Three false friends

Psalm 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

On January 11, 2024, Mark Ward posted a so-called false friends video titled “Three False Friends in One Important Verse.” I ran across it around the first part of February, listened to it, and made a comment. It was a polite pointing out of his failure to engage the New Testament commentary concerning the verse under consideration, Psalm 2:1. I observed how the record indicates that the early church interprets “people” in this verse as the people of Israel.

In the video Mark claims that “rage,” “imagine,” and “people” are false friends in Psalm 2:1.[i] At about 7:04 he begins to discuss the word “people” and spends a lot of time on it. Mark goes into a long drawn-out explanation of why “people” is a false friend. He notes that the Hebrew word is plural while the English word people is singular. Then (using the Oxford English Dictionary, OED) he explains that this was common usage of that period of English – people is plural “peoples.”[ii] He further thinks this significantly impacts the interpretation of Psalm 2:1, that heathen and people(s) represent the nations, the Gentiles. With the so-called false friend he “some readers might think this is referring to the people of Israel.”

Enter the readers of the New Testament church at Jerusalem! Mark looks at several examples of the use of the word “people” – but fails to notice the one New Testament example in which the text is mentioned and interpreted.

First, at a Jerusalem Church prayer & praise meeting, they refer to this Psalm.

Act 4:25 who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?

Next they make some application of it.

Acts 4:26-27 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together...

See the ways they relate the understanding of it.

“For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate [kings & rulers], with the Gentiles [heathen, nations], and the people of Israel [people], were gathered together,” They understand “people” to be the people of Israel, just what Mark was afraid the “false friend” would lead people to think! Acts 4:27 [some versions, oddly in my estimation, translate this “peoples of Israel.”]

To the comments I made under his YouTube video, Mark replied:

“I really like this comment, Robert—very perceptive example. But I’m not yet sure what you think it’s proving. What conclusion are you coming to here about Psalm 2 or about the argument I made about ‘peoples’ from the OED?

“This does seem to be a place where ‘people’ is expected, not ‘peoples.’ And without native-speaker-level knowledge of Greek, I’m not sure what to make of the choice of λαοῖς. I’d want to look at some commentaries.”

I make four observations:

• 1. A discussion of the meaning of words in the Old Testament should take into consideration any inspired New Testament reference or references.
• 2. λαοὶ in verse 25 (specific reference to Psalm 2:1) and λαοῖς in verse 27 are plural. In number this agrees with the Hebrew in Psalm 2:1.
• 3. They identify the “people” (λαοῖς) with Israel (Ἰσραήλ). My understanding of Acts 4:25-28 teaches me to believe the “people” in Psalm 2:1 is Israel. The original language in both places (OT Hebrew & NT Greek) is plural, but it seems odd to say in English “the peoples of Israel” (even though one might call for it in a wooden literalness, I suppose).
• 4. Speaking of commentators, one commentator who speaks of “people” as Israel in both places is John Gill. (Psalm 2:1; Acts 4:25) “by ‘the people’ are meant the people of Israel” By the way, John Gill was very proficient in Hebrew.

Later, I noticed that I had failed to address his question about the OED. The long drawn out explanation from the OED is unnecessary if one simply acknowledges and addresses the NT reference in Acts 4:25-27. Mark needs the argument from the OED coupled with the plural interpretation to turn the word “people” in Psalm 2:1 into a so-called false friend. The NT reference to the verse questions his whole roughly ten-minute point. Obviously, that hinges on the interpretation of Acts 4:25-27 being correct.  However, I am not out on some rotten KJVO limb with this interpretation. In teaching through the book of Acts, I have found this to be the common understanding. Notice this one example:

“In the prayer of the church two matters of theological interest stand out. First, there is a ‘pesher’ treatment (cf. comments on 2:16) in which the groups enumerated in the psalm are equated with the various persons and groups involved in Jesus’ crucifixion…‘the nations’ with the Gentile authorities; and ‘the people’ with ‘the people of Israel.’” Richard Longenecker, Acts (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary with the New International Version), page 104

Mark put in a lot of work preparing for and making this video. He did not put in enough. Perhaps in his excitement to make a new false friend, he completely overlooked the facts that Psalm 2:1 is quoted and applied in the New Testament. Any work that proceeds without factoring that in is incomplete, falling short of its goal.

---

[i] Mark complained of modern translations such as CSB, ESV, MEV, NKJV (as well as LSB, NCB, OJB, TLB, WEB) continuing to use the word “rage.” A a note in the NET Bible might help indicate the thinking that goes into modern translations keeping “rage.” Though NET went with “rebel” in Psalm 2, they kept “rage” in Acts 4:25, noting “The Greek word translated rage includes not only anger but opposition, both verbal and nonverbal.”

[ii] “the Hebrew here is plural people and yet the King James chose to render this word as a singular people there’s no textual variant in the Hebrew the ancient Greek Septuagint is plural too as is the Latin Vulgate … why would the King James and the Geneva Bible ... translate a plural word with a singular; there’s a reason, one based in language change just look at this the OED says that there was a time in English when the apparently singular word people could be used with plural agreement it meant Nations plural that’s just what we have in Psalm 2:1.”

An Idol now practiced in the world

“…in the room of this precious Ordinance of God (which Christ confirmed by his blood) should be set up, that Idol of sprinkling of Carnal poor Infants, for doubtless, if there be an Idol now practiced in the world, or set up amongst men, this must needs be one…”

Thomas Patient, The Doctrine of Baptisms and the Distinction of the Covenants (London: Henry Hills, 1654, p. 23)

Come, brethren, ye who love the Lord

No. 1178, “Come, brethren, ye who love the Lord,” is one of two hymns in a section of hymns on “Washing the Saints’ Feet” in Gilbert Beebe’s Baptist Hymn Book. Though Beebe himself did not hold feet washing, he apparently included two hymns for his brethren who did. (Some of his thoughts on the subject may be found HERE.)

Gilbert Beebe was born in 1800 in Norwich, Connecticut. For many years he was one of the American Baptist ministers of the Old School or Primitive Faith and Order. a printer and editor, (founded) and was, for 35 years, He was pastor of the New Vernon Primitive Baptist Church in New Vernon, New York for 35 years, and founding editor of The Signs of the Times periodical (1832). He married Phebe Ann Cunningham in 1823.

In 1858 Gilbert Beebe published The Baptist Hymn Book: Comprising a Large and Choice Collection of Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs, adapted to the Faith and Order of the Old School, or Primitive Baptists.

Beebe died in 1881. He and his wife are buried at the New Vernon Cemetery in Sullivan County, New York.

The author of the hymn itself is unknown. Beebe lists the hymn as “Altered,” indicating it may have been published previously, or if published here for the first time it was altered from the original by someone.

1. Come, brethren, ye who love the Lord, 
And walk according to his word; 
Let true humility abound, 
And in his footsteps too be found.

 
2. When your dear Lord was here below. 
He bowed to let his people know 
How they should bow his saints to greet. 
By washing one another’s feet. 

3. As in our Lord and Master, we 
A meek, but clear, example see; 
We ought to follow, as ’tis meet, 
And also wash each other’s feet.

 
4. No servants should aspire to be 
Above what in their Lord they see; 
Enough, if we like him may greet, 
And stoop and wash each other’s feet. 

5. If stronger brethren can’t accord 
In this, a precept of our Lord, 
We’ll not contend, but kindly greet— 
Give us our herbs, give them their meat. 

6. While to the letter we conform— 
Regardless of contempt and scorn; 
May we in spirit also meet,
And wash and cleanse each other’s feet.

 
7. As through this wilderness we roam 
And onward march toward heav’n our home, 
No not the filth of sin or earth
Defile our feet, or shame our birth.

8. Our feet with gospel grace well shod, 
Dress’d in the armor of our God,
In all our walks let us be seen,
With hearts, and hands, and feet all clean.

After writing the comments above, I discovered that a similar hymn of four stanzas appeared in The Primitive Hymns, Spiritual Songs, and Sacred Poems by Benjamin Lloyd. The first line begins “Come, brethren, we who love the Lord,” and there is some affinity between the two hymns.

1. Come, brethren, we who love the Lord, 

Never depart from Jesus’ word; 

Let true humility abound, 

And in his footsteps too be found.

2. Remember when Christ was below,

What condescension he did show;

He did his dear disciples greet,

And condescend to wash their feet.

3. If I your Lord and Master be,

And you my blest example see,

You should each other kindly greet,

And ought to wash each other’s feet.

4. And we who do this duty see,

With others we'll not disagree;

In lowest stoop we will them greet,

We’ll eat our herbs, and they their meat.

In other words, ubiquitous carapace

• carapace, noun. A hard layer that covers and protects animals such as crabs and turtles.
• chaplet, noun. A garland or wreath for a person’s head.
• charnel house, noun. A building or vault in which human skeletal remains are kept.
• collywobbles, noun. Pain in the stomach or bowels; belly-ache.
• doolally, adjective. Out of one’s mind, insane, mad, or eccentric.
• effete, adjective. Lacking in wholesome vigor, degenerate, decadent; exhausted of vigor or energy, worn out.
• hawker, noun. One who sells goods aggressively, especially by calling out.
• iconoclast, noun. One who destroys religious images or opposes their veneration.
• iconodule, noun. One who venerates icons and defends their devotional use.
• jejune, adjective. Without interest or significance; dull; immature; childish.
• jingoism, noun. A bellicose nationalism characterized especially by an aggressive foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism.
• libel, noun. A written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression.
• mendacity, noun. The act of not telling the truth.
• monocle, noun. A type of corrective lens or eyeglass for only one eye.
• obelus, noun. A symbol such as − or ÷ or ⁒ used in ancient manuscripts to mark a questionable passage.
• pariah, noun. An outcast; any person or animal that is generally despised or avoided.
• pluviometer, noun. An instrument to collect and measure the quantity of precipitation (esp. rain; also rain-gauge).
• prurience, noun. The quality or state of being marked by immoderate or unwholesome interest or desire.
• pince-nez, noun. A style of eyeglasses clipped to the nose by a spring (from the French, meaning to pinch the nose).
• quern, noun. A primitive hand-turned grain mill; a simple device for grinding grain between two heavy stones.
• sinophile, noun. Someone with an interest in and/or who enjoys Chinese culture, language, history, or people.
• slander, noun. Oral communication of false and malicious statements that damage the reputation of another; a false and malicious statement or report about someone.
• soupçon, noun. (from French) A small amount, slight trace, as of a particular taste or flavor.
• thereupon, adverb. Concerning that matter; upon that; directly following that; forthwith; n consequence of that.
• ubiquitous, adjective. Being or seeming to be everywhere at the same time; omnipresent.

Glossary of old book terms

Words that may come up in discussions of books, especially old books.

• Advance copy: a copy of a book usually sent to reviewers prior to publication, may be in a different format and may or may not be bound.
• Binding: the method of holding pages or sheets together; may be simply stapled or sewn, or sewn and enclosed in wrappers; most often refers to a “hard” binding or covers.
• Book formats.

Folio (fo, 2^o): the format of a book, when two leaves (four pages when printed on both sides) were printed on a sheet so that it could be folded once, collated with other folded sheets and bound, the format was “folio” (two leaves). Each leaf of a folio book thus represents one-half the size of the original sheet. More than 13 inches tall.
Quarto (4to, 4^o): the format of a book, when four leaves (eight pages) were printed on the same size sheet, which would later be folded twice, the format of the resultant volume was a “quarto” (four leaves). Each leaf of a quarto book thus represents one-fourth the size of the original sheet. Approximately 10 to 13 inches tall; average 12 inches.
Octavo (8vo, 8^o): the format of a book, when eight leaves (16 pages) were printed on the same size sheet, which would later be folded and the format of the resultant volume was an “octavo” (eight leaves). Each leaf of an octavo book thus represents one-eighth the size of the original sheet. Approximately 8 to 10 inches tall; average 9 inches.
Duodecimo (12mo, 12^o): the format of a book, when twelve leaves (24 pages) were printed on the same size sheet, which would later be folded and the format of the resultant volume was an “duodecimo” (twelve leaves). Each leaf of a duodecimo book thus represents one-twelfth the size of the original sheet. Approximately 7 to 8 inches tall; average 7.5 inches.
Sextodecimo (16mo, 16^o): the format of a book, when sixteen leaves (32 pages) were printed on the same size sheet, which would later be folded and the format of the resultant volume was an “sextodecimo” (16 leaves). Each leaf of a sextodecimo book thus represents one-sixteenth the size of the original sheet. Approximately 6 to 7 inches tall; average 6.5 inches. 
Other: there are smaller and larger books, e.g., many miniatures are 64mo.

• Broadside: a printing which occurs on a single sheet of paper and only on one side – the verso (other side) is blank; when printed on both sides, the sheet is called a “broadsheet.”
• Edition: includes the copies of a book or other printed material which originate from the same plates or setting of type. If 500 copies of a book are printed on May 5 and 300 copies are printed from the same substantially unchanged plates on July 10, all 800 copies are considered part of the same edition. Compare “printing” below.
• Flyleaf: a blank leaf (or leaves) inserted during the binding process between the free end paper and the beginning or end of the printed pages.
• Frontispiece: an illustration or plate inserted immediately in front of the title page, with the illustration facing the title page (often abbreviated as frontis.).
• Imprint: used as a noun, it refers to the publication data located at the base of a title page, usually includes the city of publication, name of the publisher (sometimes the printer), and the year of publication. Imprint is sometimes used to refer to a printed piece from a certain location or period of time.
• Issue: a portion of an edition printed or published deliberately by the printer or publisher in a distinct form differing from the rest of the printing (such a paper, binding, format, etc.). Compare “state.” [The distinction between “issue” and “state” is that “issue” relates to changes done on purpose by the publisher and intentionally treated as a separate unit.]
• Leaf (and leaves): refers to the smallest, standard physical unit of paper in a printed piece.
• n.d.: an abbreviation meaning that “no date” of publication is provided in the imprint.
• n.p.: an abbreviation meaning that “no place” of publication provided in the imprint.
• Printing: the copies of a book or other printed material which originate from the same press run or from the same plates or setting of type at one time. In the example given for “Edition” (see above), the 500 copies are the first printing and the 300 copies comprise the second printing. In the 19th century some publishers labeled later printings as if they were later editions, i.e., a second printing might be called a “second edition” on the copyright page.
• Recto: the front or right-hand side of a leaf; in the case of an open book the page on the right, with the page on the left being the verso.
• Spine (also called “shelfback” and “backstrip”): the back portion of a book’s binding which is visible when a book is shelved in a bookcase; the portion which is attached at the joints to the front and rear covers.
• State: a portion of a printing with changes such as minor alterations to the text either intentional or accidental; copies on different paper without intention of creating a separate issue, etc. Compare “issue.” [The distinction between “issue” and “state” is that “issue” relates to changes done on purpose by the publisher and intentionally treated as a separate unit.]
• Verso: the reverse or left-hand side, especially used in reference to a leaf which has a recto and verso side; in an open book the recto is the right-hand page and the verso is the left-hand page.

Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch Pisidia

Acts 14:20-24 Derbe, then follow up ministry in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch Pisidia

Verses 20-21: Though supposed to be dead, Paul was not. As the disciples were standing around him, he got up and went back into the city. Luke does not say he was dead, so this is not a miracle of resurrection. However, a miracle of healing occurred. The next day after being stoned, Paul undertook a journey of about 60 miles. Notice also, though the Jews had turned a contingent against Paul and Barnabas, there were also disciples in Lystra who stood by them for the faith. 

In II Timothy 3:11, Paul refers to things Timothy had “fully known” about him, including “persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra.” A reference to stoning is also found in II Corinthians 11:25 – “once was I stoned.” When Paul wrote to the Galatians “I bear in my body the marks (τα στιγματα) of the Lord Jesus” (Galatians 6:17), this well could include the marks of stoning at Lystra.[i]

Having stayed in Lystra overnight, the next day Paul and Barnabas left Lystra and went to the town of Derbe, a travel of some 60 miles. They had preached the gospel there, and “taught many.” After that they went back again to Lystra, where Paul had been stoned, then to Iconium and Antioch – the two cities from whence the opposing Jews who persuaded the people of Lystra to stone Paul had come. Consider their actions in light of Acts 13:51.

Verse 22: In the travels back where they had been, they were “confirming the souls of the disciples,” strengthening, establishing, making more firm or fixed. They were also “exhorting them to continue in the faith” (cf. 13:43), as well as warning them “that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God” (II Timothy 3:12). With their own eyes these disciples had seen evidence of this, in the direct opposition generally, and in the stoning of Paul particularly.

The description of the return trip is that of instructing the new disciples (teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you), rather than evangelizing unbelievers.

Verse 23: “they had ordained them elders in every church” Formal leadership is established in the churches. With prayer and fasting associated, they “commended them to the Lord” – that is, committed, entrusted (παρεθεντο cf. Luke 23:48; Acts 20:32). “The appointment of men to office in the Christian church was a matter of deep solemnity.”[ii] 

There were itinerant preachers in New Testament times, who “went every where preaching the word” (Acts 8:4). The apostles also traveled, preached, and visited. However, when churches were established and settled, an established and settled ministry was ordained in those churches. The settled ministry usually consisted of several preachers and teachers. For plurality of elders, compare Acts 13:1, Acts 20, et al.

Verse 24: Finishing their tour through Pisidia, Paul and Barnabas go to Pamphylia. They are wending their way back home.

---

[i] Some Bible students connect the timing of Paul’s stoning at Lystra with II Corinthians 12, “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.”
[ii] Ripley, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 195. “One good practice in the early church, we have departed from. They prayed with fasting. We have wonderful prayer meetings, but instead of fasting we have sisters of the congregation bring in the food for the fellowship which we sometimes overstress and they are all such good cooks that we begin feasting instead of fasting.” J. E. Wright, Treatise, p. 102.

Southern Baptists and The Law Amendment

In a post on March 1, I mentioned that though I am not Southern Baptist, I recognize and understand that the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) is the largest and most influential body of Baptists in the United States. This Convention is more often in the news than any other body of Baptists. In the minds of many Americans, what Southern Baptists believe and practice is what Baptists believe and practice. For that reason, as an outsider I sometimes address issues specific to the SBC. An SBC issue in the news, as well as lighting up YouTube, blogs and X posts, is what is called the “Law Amendment.”[i]

This is a proposed amendment to the SBC Constitution, Article 3, Paragraph 1, which defines the makeup or composition of the Convention, including what kind of churches can be deemed in “friendly cooperation” with the Convention. The amendment proposes a sixth affirmation clarifying such cooperating churches.

The Convention will only deem a church to be in friendly cooperation with the Convention, and sympathetic with its purposes and work (i.e., a “cooperating” church as that term is used in the Convention’s governing documents) which…6. Affirms, appoints, or employs only men as any kind of pastor or elder as qualified by Scripture. [bolded portion is the proposed amendment]

The intent of the amendment is to exclude from the SBC churches that have female pastors.[ii] The use of the word “pastor” by churches in the SBC may range from the main preaching pastor to a woman who is the “pastor” overseeing the nursery program. For many it becomes an opportune word rather than a biblical word.

In February of 2023, the SBC Executive Committee voted to remove from its ranks the prominent Saddleback Church founded by progressive Rick Warren for having a female teaching pastor functioning in the office of pastor. In June the messengers of the Convention rejected Warren’s appeal and sustained the vote of the Executive Committee. At this time they also passed the first approval of the “Law Amendment.” It seems that the amendment intends totake the decision to oust a church out of being a subjective case-by-case decision made by the Executive Committee to being one firmly founded in the Constitution itself.

Proponents of the amendment argue that it will stabilize the convention “and guard us from the drift toward liberalism.” Opponents offer all sorts of arguments, from parliamentary matters to at least a light defense of women in pastoral roles as long as they are not “senior pastors.”[iii] They claim there is no “drift toward liberalism.” As an outsider looking in, it is my opinion that the “Conservative Resurgence” was not as much Conservative or Resurgence as either defenders or detractors of it like to think.[iv] Regardless, conservatism must be continually reasserted and reapplied. Often liberals simply duck down in their holes until the time seems right to pop their heads back up.

Some links with information about the controversy (pro & con):

• Can Anything Clear Come Out of Confusion? The Self-Contradiction, Omission, and Myopia of the Law Amendment -- “For the Law Amendment to be taken seriously, all supposed improper uses of the title should be addressed.”
• Can’t we all just get along in the SBC? -- “The SBC has no official power over any congregation, for better or for worse. The SBC does, however, have power to determine its own composition.”
• How Many Female Pastors are in the SBC? -- “The information collected is all publicly available. We checked every church against official SBC listings.”
• Letter: A Call to Keep Our Unity -- “The signatories to this letter join me in urging you to recommend the above amendment at the 2023 annual meeting. This action will bring clarity to the current confusion in our Convention...”
• Open Letter to Baptist Women -- “Even today, men are taking actions against women who are ministering, leading, and pastoring to spread the love and grace of Jesus Christ. They are wrong.”
• Responding to Opposition to the Law Amendment -- “The amendment simply clarifies what our Constitution already provides—that Southern Baptists wish to cooperate with churches that call biblically qualified men as pastors.”
• The State of the SBC -- “The question is going forward, do we want to have to consider every one of these things on a case-by-case basis? Because, I think the answer to that has to be no.”

---

[i] So-called because it was proposed by Mike Law, pastor of Arlington Baptist Church, Arlington, Virginia. As of 31 January 2023, a letter from Law about the amendment had gained over 2000 supporting signatures from SBC pastors and professors. I do not know its current status, numerically.

[iii] It is my understanding that this amendment was passed by the SBC messengers in June 2023, and that the constitution requires a second vote – that is, an amendment must be approved by 23 of the messenger in two consecutive annual meetings of the Convention.

[iii] Whatever that is. It is nothing, biblically speaking.
[iv] And certainly not a “takeover,” as the opposition grumbles. In 1978, the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention and other entities sponsored a forum called the Consultation on Women in Church-Related Vocations. Now in 2023-24, after some perhaps 40 years of so-called “takeover,” the SBC is dealing with the fallout of women in church-related vocations (particularly ordained ones).

Critique of “A Nearly Forgotten Heritage: The Geneva Bible”

A critique of “A Nearly Forgotten Heritage: The Geneva Bible,” by Jonathan Edwards (a modern one, not the Puritan preacher) represents another curious piece of the “pro-Geneva/anti-KJV” puzzle.[i] It contains some of the so-called “common knowledge” that is “widely available online” which passes for historical truth.

“In 1568, the Bishops Bible was published. Although partially using the Tyndale work, it mostly translated from the Latin Vulgate.”

This is false, The Bishops Bible was not “mostly translated from the Latin Vulgate.”

“The Geneva remained popular, and despite many reprints, the Geneva did not require any revisions.”

This is also false. Yes, the Geneva Bible was revised – one revision admitted by this author – but there were others as well. The Geneva Bible itself finds its basis in the prior English translations. Some Geneva Bibles were printed with the New Testament revised by Laurence Tomson (for example, this 1590 printing).[ii]

“All of the KJV printings prior to 1666 contained the Apocrypha...”

This is probably generally true, but not totally correct, in an age when printers bound Bibles in all sorts of ways (e,g., they might add the Book of Common Prayer, Sternhold and Hopkins Psalter, etc.) This 1637 printing of the KJV does not contain the Apocrypha, but skips from Malachi to Matthew.

“…the King James Bible…also included the Apocrypha, books the Roman church used, but which had been removed from the Geneva (the 1560 edition did include the books in an ‘inter-testamental’ section). No marginal notes, no cross-references…”

This statement implies that King James translation did not have the Apocrypha in an “inter-testemantal” sections – but it does! It does not deal with The Prayer of Manasseh, which in the Geneva Bible did not include in or ever move to the “inter-testamental” section. He further misunderstands marginal notes and cross references, both of which the 1611 contain. However, it did not have commentary or study notes, as the Geneva Bible.

“It was a publishing failure. The people did not flock to the new Bible, they continued to use the tried and true Geneva.”

“In its first five years of existence, readers called for seventeen editions, compared with six editions of the Geneva Bible during those same years. Expanding the time frame, in the first 35 years of its existence the KJV went through a whopping 182 editions.” See “The Reception of the King James Bible” in Correcting the Internet.

“The Mayflower pilgrims brought the Geneva to America. As I learned my family history as a 10th generation descendant of John and Priscilla (speak for yourself, John) Alden, I became interested in the Geneva Bible. John’s Bible is on display in the museum at his home near Plymouth, Massachusetts.”

Apparently, this descendant of John Alden does not know Alden’s Bible on display in the museum at Plymouth is not a Geneva Bible, but is rather a King James Bible instead.

“The KJV...is nearly word-for-word identical to the Geneva. Because of the exceptionally close copy of the KJV to the Geneva, I refer to the ‘Authorized Version’ as the ‘Plagiarized Version.’ It is simply hard to believe that being so close, with the exception of maybe 10 places, the KJV is not simply plagiarized rather than an actual work of dedicated scholars.”

This is strange complaint from one touting the Geneva Bible. If it is so great, then he ought to be glad its replacement was so exactly like it! However, in honesty the King James translation definitely is not a plagiarized version of the Geneva Bible, and there are certainly many more than 10 places where the Geneva is different. Many many more. Yet it is true that all the early generations of the English Bible are all built on the work of one William Tyndale. And rightly so.

It is good that this (probably young) “amateur Christian historian” is interested in the Geneva Bible and the history of the English Bible. It is bad that he gets so many facts wrong – facts that someone else can now come along and say this is information “widely available online”! Sadder still that a site that dubs itself “Christian History Institute” allows such to pass as “Christian History.” “Maybe 10 places” the KJV is different from the Geneva? Does anybody at CHI even check the stuff that gets posted?

---

[i] “Jonathan Edwards is an amateur Christian historian living in the Salt Lake Valley. He has studied many eras of Christian history in depth, most recently focusing on the Reformation. He is a descendant of John Alden, a crew member of the historic 1620 voyage of the Mayflower, which brought the English settlers known as Pilgrims to Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts.”

[ii] A Dictionary of the Bible, Extra Volume, James Hastings, Editor. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1912, p. 250.

Draw out the sweet

Psalm 119:103 How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!

“It is not hasty reading, but serious meditating upon holy and heavenly truths, that make them prove sweet and profitable to the soul.”

“It is not the bee’s touching of the flower, which gathers honey—but her abiding for a time upon the flower, which draws out the sweet.” 

Thomas Brooks

Joy is a Fruit

John Newton wrote “Joy is a Fruit,” which was published in his and William Cowper’s Olney Hymns, in Three Books (London: W. Oliver, 1779). It is found in six common meter stanzas as Hymn 42 on pages 54-55 (Book I), with the scripture text “The joy of the Lord is your strength,” Nehemiah Chap. ix. 10. Newton was born in 1725, and died in 1807. He was buried at St Mary Woolnoth Churchyard in London, where he ministered nearly 30 years. In 1893, the remains of he and his wife Mary were moved to the churchyard of St. Peter and Paul in Olney, the town where he and Cowper produced their famous hymn book.

In life Newton is well known as a converted former slave trader who helped influence its eventual abolishment in England. In hymnody, he is best known as the author of “Amazing grace, how sweet the sound.”

One tune with which this hymn is commonly found published is Elizabethtown, by George Kingsley. Kingsley was born in 1811 in Northampton, Massachusetts and died in Northampton in 1884. He married Mary D. Dwight in 1836, and they had at least five children, George D., Charles H., William M., Edward, and Mary.

Kingsley played the organ in Boston, Massachusetts at the Old South and Hollis Street churches and taught music in Philadelphia and Northampton. The American Classical Hymns site describes Kingsley as “Shy, modest to a fault, and all but forgotten today,” but that in his lifetime he “enjoyed moderate renown as a music teacher, compiler, and organist.” 

Elizabethtown probably first appeared in Kingsley’s tunebook The Sacred Choir: a Collection of Church Music in 1838, where it is found in the lower brace of page 109. Kingsley compiled a number of music books in his lifetime, including: The Harmonist, 1833 and Templi Carmina, 1853.

1. Joy is a fruit that will not grow
In nature’s barren soil;
All we can boast, till Christ we know,
Is vanity and toil.

2. But where the Lord has planted grace,
And made his glories known,
There fruits of heavenly joy and peace
Are found, and there alone.

3. A bleeding Saviour seen by faith,
A sense of pard’ning love,
A hope that triumphs over death,
Give joys like those above.

4. To take a glimpse within the vail,
To know that God is mine;
Are springs of joy that never fail,
Unspeakably divine!*

5. These are the joys that satisfy
And sanctify the mind;
Which make the spirit mount on high,
And leave the world behind.

6. No more, believers, mourn your lot,
But if you are the Lord’s,
Resign to them that know him not,
Such joys as earth affords.

* Changed in later printings to “Unspeakable! divine!”

Murder and Witchcraft in the Mountains, and other links

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the sites linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the specific posts linked.

• A Cut Above -- “Many assume Jim Bowie became famous defending the Alamo in 1836. In truth, he was already quite famous 10 years before.”
• “bated breath” vs. “baited breath” -- “...it’s not possible to have baited breath, even if you eat a ton of minnows.”
• Coast Guard Refuses to Enforce New California Regulation -- “What we see here is just another example of how far California is from every other state and even from the federal government on its commitment to the shrill environmentalist agenda”.
• Counterpart in the Tilley Feud - Stanley Church of Christ, org. 1886 -- “The church started out as a Primitive Baptist church and also served as the community schoolhouse serving up to 40 children. Sometime in the early 1900’s it became a Church of Christ. ”
  
• Deciphering scribal abbreviations -- “The rules governing abbreviations were flexible, and scribes did not adhere to the exact same sets of rules regarding them. However, general patterns can be discerned for scribal abbreviations.”
• Full List of Resurrections in the Bible -- “...all of the resurrections that are mentioned in Scripture for reference.I have also decided to include a list of ‘honorable mentions.’”
• How Many Female Pastors are in the SBC? -- “The information collected is all publicly available. We checked every church against official SBC listings.”
• Murder and Witchcraft in the Mountains - Tilley Bend Baptist, org. 1858 -- “Martin Free offered a deed of gift on a three-acre lot in a gully near the Toccoa River to a group of believers who formed the Mount Pleasant Baptist Church, the predecessor of Tilley Bend Baptist Church.”
• No Law in Georgia for Mormons -- “Cumorah Mormon Church in Coffee County was founded. Today, this empty church building is the oldest LDS church building that is still standing in Georgia.”
• Texas’ Heartbeat -- “Nestled on the banks of the Brazos River, this charming site was once the headquarters for Stephen F. Austin’s colony and is now a fascinating glimpse into the lives of early Texians.”
• The Theological Heresies of Westcott and Hort -- “Westcott denied the historicity of Genesis 1 to 3...Hort wrote: I am inclined to think that no such state as ‘Eden’ (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants...”
• Utilizing Unclaimed Letter Lists in the Newspapers -- “If your ancestor’s name was in a list of letters over an extended period, it could hint at certain life events. Illness, traveling, death, or a possible move may have been why a letter was not claimed.”
• Was the King James Bible on the Mayflower? -- “Mrs. Baker responded very graciously, leaving no doubt that she believes that Alden brought the KJV with him on the Mayflower.”

Baptist Debate History

I have a printing of the Causey-Bridwell Debate, printed in 1978. The debate actually occurred 40 years earlier, in 1938 in Poplar Bluff, Missouri. Here is some newspaper material related to it.

Daily American Republic, Monday, January 17, 1938, p. 8

Faith and Victory, Vol. 14, No. 8, July 1939, p. 6

Daily American Republic, Monday, August 8, 1938, p. 8

The above newspaper article is referenced in an appendix to the debate. Causey says that Bridwell testified he has been healed of gallstones at an earlier time. Bridwell says the August 8th newspaper report was in error.

Resolving Acts 13:20

Some Bible commentators get right the “big things” like the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus – but cannot be trusted when it comes to numbers, years, chronology. By this I do not mean their mathematical calculations, but rather that they do not have the same confidence in biblical chronology that they have in biblical theology. For example, an older Baptist commentator writes:

Thus there is a difference of one hundred and twelve years between the dates which Paul followed, and those which appear to have been used at an earlier period [i.e., 1 Kings 6:1, rlv]. Such differences as these, however, in dates, are not of material importance. The letters which were employed in ancient manuscripts for numbers may, in some instances, have been wrongly copied, or incorrectly deciphered; and as the attention of readers was not particularly directed to the subject of chronology, the means of correcting a copyist’s misstatement, should one occur, would be likely to perish.[i]

 Certainly, there is a sense in which we will all agree that getting the substitutionary atonement right is more important than figuring out how certain numbers add up and relate correctly. On the other hand, if we cannot trust God on the little things, can we trust him on the big things? The Bible believer’s approach is to expect God got his figures correct to begin with, and has preserved them accurately – rather than blame difficulties on scribal errors, emendations, and such like. And sometimes we may just need to admit that we do not know the answer.

The context (a Pauline sermon, Acts 13:16-22).

16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience. 17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it. 18 And about the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness. 19 And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Chanaan, he divided their land to them by lot. 20 And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet. 21 And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years. 22 And when he had removed him, he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.

In this account, we find that God established his people in the land of Canaan. He destroyed seven nations of Canaanites, then divided the land to the tribes by lot. See Numbers 26:55-56; Joshua 19:51; et al. Then God led his people by judges he raised up, over the course of 450 years. Samuel the prophet was the last of the judges. When they desired a king instead of judges, God gave them Saul (I Samuel 10:21-24), their first king who reigned of forty years.

A textual variant.

A textual variant in Acts 13:20 creates a difference in interpretation and a possible different historical account. Look at two different texts, first the Textus Receptus stream.

• TR1894: και μετα ταυτα ως ετεσιν τετρακοσιοις και πεντηκοντα εδωκεν κριτας εως σαμουηλ του προφητου
• 1611 KJV: And after that he gave unto them judges, about the space of foure hundred and fifty yeeres untill Samuel the prophet.

The majority of texts (manuscripts) agree with Textus Receptus. For example, an English translation of MT: “And after these things, for about four hundred and fifty years, He gave them judges until the time of Samuel the prophet.” However, the Critical Text changes the wording and the meaning.

• CT: ὡς ἔτεσιν τετρακοσίοις καὶ πεντήκοντα. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἔδωκεν κριτὰς ἕως Σαμουὴλ τοῦ προφήτου.
• NIV: All this took about 450 years. After this, God gave them judges until the time of Samuel the prophet.

So, to compare Acts 13:20 in the KJV and the NIV:

• KJV: And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.
• NIV: All this took about 450 years. After this, God gave them judges until the time of Samuel the prophet.

In the King James Bible and other TR translations, the 450 years mentioned appears to refer to the time of the judges to Samuel. The NIV and others (ESV, NET, LEB, etc.) apply the time frame of 450 years to the choosing of the ancestors, the exile in Egypt, coming out of Egypt, 40 years wandering in the wilderness, and the conquering and dividing of the land of Canaan. Concerning the translation of the CT reading, the NET Bible notes admit, “The words ‘all this took’ are not in the Greek text, but are supplied to make a complete statement in English.”

Those who have no textual confidence concerning the copying and transmission of the numbers of the Bible tend to make only a modest effort to resolve chronological difficulties, and then, when necessary, seek refuge in “copyists’ errors.”[ii] The Bible-believer with confidence in the copying and transmission will make every effort to resolve chronological difficulties. That is the “Bible-believing way.” However, sometimes they “over-exert” and make up unbelievable resolutions when it would be better to just explain, “I don’t know.”

This, in fact, can be a difficult passage for Bible students to reconcile with 1 Kings 6:1, “And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord.” It seems to create too great a length of time from the Exodus to the building of the temple.

Some comments of others.

Josephus (C. J. Ellicott).

“Josephus (Ant. viii. 3, § 1) gives 592 years from the Exodus to the building of Solomon’s Temple. Of this period sixty-five years were occupied by the wanderings in the wilderness and the conquest under Joshua, eighty-four by the reigns of Saul and David and the first four years of Solomon, leaving 443 years for the period of the Judges. This agrees, it will be seen, sufficiently with the Received text in this passage, but leaves the discrepancy with 1Kings 6:1 unexplained. There would of course, be nothing strange in St. Paul’s following the same traditional chronology as Josephus, even where it differed from that of the present Hebrew text of the Old Testament.”

Geneva Bible.

17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arme brought he them out of it. 18 And about the time of forty yeeres suffered he their maners in the wildernesse. 19 And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Chanaan, he divided their land to them by lot: 20 And after that he gave unto them judges, about the space of foure hundred and fifty yeeres until Samuel the prophet.

1560: For these 450 yeres were not fully accomplished, but there lacked 3 years counting from the birth of Isaac to the distribution of ye land of Canaan.[iii]

1599: There were from the birth of Isaac unto the destruction of the Canaanites under the governance of Joshua four hundred and seven and forty years, and therefore he addeth in this place, this word, About, for there want three years, but the Apostle useth the whole greater number.

1599: In this space of forty years must the time of Samuel be reckoned with the days of Saul: for the kingdom did as it were swallow up his government.

Cornelius a Lapide, et al.

Some count 450 years from the birth of Isaac. “Cornelius a Lapide, Calovius, Mill, and others supply γενόμενα after πεντήκοντα, post haec, quae spatio 450 annorum gesta sunt, so that the terminus a quo is the birth of Isaac, in whom God chose the fathers; from thence to the birth of Jacob are 60 years, from the birth of Jacob to the entrance into Egypt are 130 years, after which the residence in Egypt lasted 210 years, and then from the Exodus to the division of Canaan 47 years elapsed, making in all 447 years,—accordingly, about 450 years.”

Albert Barnes.

Several scholars have tried to resolve it by “blaming” Paul with relying on tradition rather than inspiration. So Albert Barnes: “Paul would naturally use the chronology which was in current, common use among the Jews. It was not his business to settle such points; but he would speak of them as they were usually spoken of, and refer to them as others did…Thus, (Antiq., book 7, chapter 3, section 1), Josephus says expressly that Solomon ‘began to build the temple in the fourth year of his reign, 592 years after the exodus out of Egypt,’ etc. This would allow 40 years for their being in the wilderness, 17 years for Joshua, 40 for Samuel and Saul, 40 for the reign of David, and 452 years for the time of the judges and the times of anarchy that intervened. This remarkable coincidence shows that this was the chronology which was then used, and which Paul had in view.”

Will Kinney, Joey Faust.

Some KJV Defenders argue that the years in Acts 13:20 and 1 Kings 6:1 represent different ways of counting. So Will Kinney: “Let us then infer that Paul has given us the length of the period in ordinary, common years (with no specialized criteria). On the other hand, let us infer that the author of 1st Kings has also given us a correct answer, but to a different question. He has given us the length of the same period, minus certain years that do not meet the criteria of his chronology. Let us suppose that the author of 1st Kings is not answering the question of how long the period was in ordinary, normal years with no qualifications. Let us suppose that he is giving us the number of years minus, let’s say, the years Israel was delivered over to its enemies in bondage and servitude throughout that period of the ‘Judges’…The Bible sometimes counts years in such a way that it ‘skips’ those that do not fit into the framework it is counting in.”

KJV Today.

“…the numbers in 1 Kings 6:1 and Acts 13:20 in the KJV fit together extremely well if we understand ‘after’ in Acts 13:20 as a preposition and realize that Moses was raised up to be the first judge in about 1483 BC…There is only a 4-year discrepancy between the histories in 1 Kings 6:1 and Acts 13:20, which is completely acceptable since we are dealing in most cases with round numbers. Acts 13:20 in the KJV is not an error, but a clear statement as to how many years God gave judges to Israel.”

Final Considerations.

1. The years mentioned in both 1 Kings 6:1 and Acts 13:20 are unquestionably chronologically and historically accurate. If the Bible is inspired and preserved by God it cannot be otherwise.

2. I cannot see how a reading of the 450 years in the King James translation can begin from the time of the birth of Isaac to the division of Canaan. Nevertheless, there are some King James Defenders that interpret it that way.

 

3. To reject the TR reading creates different chronological problems, albeit possibly considered a simpler problem by some. Additionally, for some it stymies Paul to only having access to the common knowledge of his day. Thus, he had no miraculous gift of knowledge to understand and preach the matter correctly.

4. Again, sometimes it is okay to say, “I know the Bible is right, I just don’t currently have the knowledge and understanding to explain it.”

If any readers have an idea, a good resolution, or just a comment on this, please let me know.

---

[i] Henry J. Ripley. The Acts of the Apostles with Notes, Chiefly Explanatory, Boston, MA: Gould, Kendall, and Lincoln, 1843, p. 178.

[ii] “…nothing is more perplexing than the chronology of ancient facts. The difficulty is found in all writings; in profane as well as sacred. Mistakes are so easily made in transcribing numbers, where letters are used instead of writing the words at length, that we are not to wonder at such errors.” Albert Barnes.

[iii] Paul’s use of the word “about” (ὡς) indicates he is not aiming at very exacting chronology to the year, but rather a round figure (i.e., close, but “rounded” to a nearer round number).

Correction

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

General comments on verses 16 and 17:

The fact and purpose of inspiration is to profit the man of God in giving him all he needs to know, believe, and do. The Bible tells us what to believe and how to live. Doctrine (belief), Reproof (direct blame or censure), Correction (making accurate the inaccurate), Instruction (informing the understanding, conveying knowledge) – what is right and wrong to believe (doctrine, reproof), what is right and wrong to do (correction, instruction in righteousness), all four to know. Cf. Matthew 7:15-16 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits... Both their forecast and fruit is false.

The Bible is inspired, preserved, and sufficient. If the Bible were the only book you had, you are able to find every truth you need for salvation and for living the Christian life.

Correction indicates there is a standard, and that a standard is needed.

We see a standard in the shorter word “correct.” As a noun, it means free from error; accurate; an acknowledged or accepted standard.

Let God be true, but every man a liar, Romans 3:4.

Every word of God is pure, Proverbs 30:5.

We live in an age when men generally – and even professed Christians – are more concerned about correcting the Bible than about the Bible correcting them. A serious problem with the status of Bible reading in the United States – after the lack of Bible reading – is that we live in a time and with a state of mind such that if you don’t like what you read in the Bible today, you can buy a new version tomorrow. Additionally “everyday” Christians have been flooded with the kind of research that was once mostly limited to higher and lower critics in the dusty musty halls of academia. Notes and brackets cast doubt on the text. Those who don’t know the difference between majuscules and magistrates, minuscules and miniscules, or uncials and uncles, think they have become the arbiters of the text of the Bible. On the alleged authority of the scholarship somewhere behind the notes in their Bibles, these readers often choose what they like and reject what they don’t like.

Correction begins with wrong and brings it to right.

As a verb, “correct” means to point out or mark the errors in, to remove the errors or faults from. The noun “correction” refers to the act of pointing out and removing errors from, substituting the right for what is wrong. Webster says “the act of bringing back from error or deviation to a just standard.” It is used in Proverbs in connection with the training of children (Proverbs 22:15; 23:13; 29:17) and more broadly of wrongdoers.

Proverbs 15:10 Correction is grievous unto him that forsaketh the way: and he that hateth reproof shall die. Cf. Proverbs 7:22.

Often, we tend to think of correction as only the pointing out of what is wrong. We may think of a teacher “correcting” her students’ answers by marking them wrong. It must begin there, but should not end there.

Ephesians 4 excellently illustrates this principle – put off and put on. Don’t do this, but rather do that. 4:14-15 (not tossed about, but grow in truth and love); 22-24 (put off old man, put on new man); 25 (put away lying, speak the truth); 28 (steal no more, but labour); 29 (no corrupt communication, communication that is good); 31-32 (put away this, and do this instead).

Proverbs 3:12 for whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

If all have sinned, we need correction.

If the Bible is true, we need correction.

If there is a God, we need correction.