Translate

Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Let a man examine himself

“But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” 1 Corinthians 11:28

Verse 28 begins with the word “But,” placing what Paul is about to say over against and in contrast to what he has just said – the church member is encouraged to participate, and to participate in a way that is discerning and knowing “of the body and blood of the Lord.”

I. Let a man examine himself.

“Examine” – to observe, test, inquire, investigate, inspect or scrutinize carefully. 1 Corinthians 9:3; 2 Corinthians 13:5

  • Where do we do this? “when ye come together in the church” 11:18.
  • Who is doing this? “the church of God which is at Corinth” “in the church” “you” 1:2; 11:18, 23.
  • What are we doing? “this is my body, which is broken for you...This cup is the new testament in my blood” 11:24-25.
  • Why are we doing this? “ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” 11:26.
  • When do we do this? “as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup” 11:26.

II. So let him eat.

“So” – in such manner; in the way or manner indicated or described. John 3:18; Luke 12:28

  • Where do we do this? “when ye come together in the church” 11:18.
  • Who is doing this? “the church of God which is at Corinth” “in the church” “you” 1:2; 11:18, 23.
  • What are we doing? “this is my body, which is broken for you...This cup is the new testament in my blood” 11:24-25.
  • Why are we doing this? “ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” 11:26.
  • When do we do this? “as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup” 11:26.


Note: A true “Open Communion” finds in this statement (verse 28) their one and only restriction from eating the Lord’s supper. The opinion of the independent individual becomes the be-all and end-all of whether or not one takes communion. However, the purpose of Paul is not to restrict a prospective participant from eating, but to prepare and encourage “so” one (of the “you” to whom he is writing) may eat – that is, eat in such a manner as Paul has just described and taught.

Tuesday, September 17, 2024

Worship in Hymns

WORSHIP IN HYMNS 
By Robert Inman Johnson

This essay first appeared in The Tie, a monthly publication of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, circa 1948. The Seminary’s professor of Music, R. Inman Johnson, wrote “Worship In Hymns.”. I have not seen the original, but have taken this digested version from The Word and Work, April 1948, Volume XLII, pp. 88-90. Posting this is not an endorsement of everything Johnson writes in the essay. Nevertheless, he makes some good points, and I think you will find it an interesting representation of music and hymnology taught by Southern Baptists in the mid-20th century. Everything below is by R. Inman Johnson.

Hymns have been said to be directed toward God, toward the Christian (including ourselves), or toward the sinner. To God we sing our praise and thanksgiving and pour out our songs of aspiration, petition, and promise of faithfulness. For the Christian we sing songs of encouragement and lift each other in prayerful tones to God. To the sinner we show our love for God, His love for the sinner, and plead for the sinner’s acceptance of this love. These are high and holy ideals. Hence, we should give attention to the singing part of the service. 

We do not undertake to define “worship service” beyond saying it should result in an awareness of our relationship to God and His purpose for our lives. True it is that God may be met anywhere, in the sanctuary, in the street, or in the field. We may worship alone or as a component part of a congregation. To be a member of a congregation which gives itself to intense worship is a thrilling experience. We go away saying that God has been with us. 

Corporate worship must be directed through man by the Holy Spirit. There must be both preparation and correct performance. A real worship period does not just happen. We need to know how to prepare a service and the people need instruction in their responsibilities. The fact is, the preachers have not taught the people how to worship. Surely it is worthwhile, for only true worship promotes real spiritual growth. 

In choosing hymns for a service, we need to know the contents of the hymnal as related to the needs of the people. And, they should be chosen for a definite purpose, with some relationship of ideas. This idea may correspond with the ideas in the sermon or it may not. Certainly it should not be foreign or antagonistic to the sermon. Seldom do I know the sermon subject beforehand and I am often amazed at the fitness of my selections. If you ask, the Holy Spirit will help you choose the hymns. In evangelistic meetings, I usually wait to choose the invitation hymn until I see where the sermon is headed. 

In preparing ourselves to sing we need to remember that most good hymns represent a spiritual experience in the life of the writer. By our singing we make this experience our own. We should thrill with the idea that thousands of saints before us have sung the text and thousands will sing it after us. Thus we are members of one great choir which one day shall be gathered before the throne of God to sing eternal hallelujahs. What a privilege to join that choir of heavenly witnesses. 

If, then, in corporate singing we share the spiritual life of others, we should see to it that we grow in grace through a wide variety of experience. Often we fail here because we want good singing; hence, we choose over and over a few hymns the people sing well. New hymns and tunes should be introduced to deepen our Christian experience. 

For instance, in 58 chapel services and broadcasts we have sung 157 different hymns. This is a large number when compared with the average church repertoire. I have a typewritten copy of the index of the hymnal. When a hymn is selected, the date is written after it on this copy. Thus, too frequent repetition is prevented. In the limited church program, a hymn should not appear more than once per month. 

Many ideas may be followed in selecting hymns. Usually, when three hymns are used before the sermon, the first is a strong hymn of praise. The second spot may be used to introduce new or less familiar texts and tunes. Also, I like here the short hymns of definite worship value set to such tunes as Manoah, Bera, Belmont, St. Agnes, etc. They have both beauty and strength. The third hymn may be more subjective with a sense of individual devotion, consecration or aspiration. It should be thoroughly familiar. The fine gospel hymns are well placed here. 

Remember also that these three hymns should vary in key signature, mood and pace. It is tiring to sing consecutive songs in the same key and at the same rate of speed. Start with a good tempo, the next may be slower. The mood may change from objective praise to subjective examination of our own hearts. For instance, using the idea of serving Christ: 1. We praise Him with “Crown Him with Many Crowns.” 2. In a slower tempo and quite different quality of tone, we consider our relation to Him in “Must Jesus Bear the Cross Alone.” 3. In a stronger rhythm we make our promise in “O Jesus, I have promised to serve thee to the end.” 

The manner of our singing has much to do with its effectiveness for ourselves and for others. Ineffective singing is by no means confined to the small rural church but is to be found in all classes of churches. It most often is the result of a lack of understanding on the part of the people of the worship value of hymns. God desires our hearts and minds, not merely the sacrifice of attendance on His services. Many of us go to church merely to hear the sermon, having no interest in the praise service. Many are too tired physically and mentally to sing, not realizing that a thrilling spiritual experience by means of a great hymn will completely remove this burden of fatigue. Our poor singing may be due sometimes to the hymns themselves, which may depict experiences quite foreign to our own and which, furthermore, give a situation in which we cannot conceive ourselves. Hence, congregational hymns should contain universal experiences, those to which we are all subject. This is true of the hymns which survive the test of years. A song which is local or limited in subject matter to a small group may be popular for a time but not for long. 

Again, poor singing may result from a poor fit of hymn and tune. A joyful hymn set to a doleful tune loses much of its worth for us. Likewise, a superficial tune may destroy the value of a noble hymn. 

…Many other things may enter to cause poor singing, such as acoustics, temperature, stuffy atmosphere, etc. I am convinced that the most intelligent congregational singing requires a director or precentor. By this I mean a person who can direct the people in their worship in song… 

Effective singing, solo or group, takes cognizance of the fact that music rises in intensity to a climax somewhere in the composition. All good hymn tunes progress in some way from the first chord to a climax. The hymn itself also reaches a point where emotion is most intense. Ideally these points in text and tune should coincide. This climax may result in more volume or in more intensity at the same level of volume. Certainly it should keenly intensify the meaning of the text in our consciousness. For after all, the text is the hymn. The tune makes easier and more emphatic the entry of its meaning into our hearts. 

It is the director’s problem to interpret text and tune for the congregation. One chief method is a change in dynamics from loud to soft or vice versa. Frequently we hear a leader say, “Sing the second verse softly.” Few stanzas call for quiet singing throughout at the same level. They demand a change of dynamics within themselves. This calls for controlled directing, not just “time-beating.” 

A good example may be found in the hymn, “Jesus, Lover of My Soul,” to the tune, Martyn. Beginning from the first stanza, quietly increase the volume and intensity until the words, “Guide me, O my Savior hide,” are poured out with all of our being. Diminish from “Safe into the haven, guide” to the end. The tune is well-suited to the stanzas. … There is no place here for lifeless singing. Let us by no means, though, confuse loud singing with intensified singing. Quiet singing with awareness of our purpose can be beautiful and thrilling. 

The goal of congregational singing is the participation of every individual present, suitable hymns varied in mood and tempo, a variation inside the hymn itself, and often a variation inside the stanzas. This demands a competent director and a responsive audience. 

Good “church music” may not always be good music, for the purpose of church music is spiritual growth. This then, which may also be said of preaching, is my answer: “Good church music is that music which in a given situation intensifies and promotes spiritual growth.” 

“In the midst of the congregation will I sing thy praise.”— Heb. 2:12.

Monday, September 16, 2024

The Book of God

“You have a Bible: but perhaps you have never fully considered what a wonderful treasure you Bible is. As it stands on the shelf, it looks much like another book, and if you open it and turn over its leaves, it looks so still; in print, and paper, and binding, there is nothing remarkable about it. But its contents, its words, how different they are from those of any other book! This is the Book of God. God inspired those who wrote it, God taught them what to say…

“Such is the treasure you have in that Book which stands among others on your book-shelf; alike in appearance, but how different in reality; they the books of men, this the Word of God! …

“Take your Bible in hand every day. Read it humbly, seriously, and prayerfully; read it as from God; read it with a true desire to learn from it, and to live by it; then God will speak to you by it indeed, and make it a lamp to your feet and a light to your path.”

The Bible,” Francis Bourdillon, 1870


Sunday, September 15, 2024

I Heard the Voice of Jesus say

“I heard the voice of Jesus say,” by Horatius Bonar, is at times titled “Christ’s Invitation.” According to John Julian, it was first published in his Hymns Original and Selected, in 1846. It appears below as found in Bonar’s Hymns of Faith and Hope (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1857, pp. 145-146). It is titled “The Voice from Galilee” followed by the Scripture text “Of His fulness have all we received, and grace for grace —John i. 16.” The hymn consists of three stanzas of 8 lines, Common Meter Doubled.

1. I heard the voice of Jesus say,
Come unto me and rest;
Lay down, thou weary one, lay down
Thy head upon my breast.
I came to Jesus as I was,
Weary, and worn, and sad,
I found in him a resting-place,
And he has made me glad.

2. I heard the voice of Jesus say,
Behold, I freely give
The living water,—thirsty one,
Stoop down, and drink, and live.
I came to Jesus, and I drank
Of that life-giving stream,
My thirst was quench’d, my soul revived,
And now I live in him.

3. I heard the voice of Jesus say,
I am this dark world’s Light;
Look unto me, thy morn shall rise,
And all thy day be bright.
I look’d to Jesus, and I found
In him my Star, my Sun;
And in that light of life I’ll walk
Till travelling days are done.

The structure of the hymn captures the idea of something Jesus says, and then relates the hearer’s response to what he said. The first stanza is based on Matthew 11:28, Jesus’s exhortation, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” The hearer responds to the voice of Jesus – “Come unto me” with “I came,” and “I will give you rest” with “I found in him a resting-place.” The second stanza is, I believe, a composite of John 4:10-14 and Revelation 21:6, “I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.” The hearer responds to the voice of Jesus – “I freely give the living water…drink, and live” with “I drank…now I live in him.” The third stanza is based on John 8:12, “Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world…” The hearer responds to the voice of Jesus – “I am this dark world’s Light; look unto me” with “I looked…I found in him my Star, my Sun.”

This has been and is a popular hymn, and for that reason has been paired with many different tunes. With the tune Vox Dilecti, John Bacchus Dykes (1823-1876) tried to capture the contrast of the first and second halves of the stanzas. He used the key of G minor to present Jesus’s invitation, and then changed to the key of G Major in the second half to express the acceptance of the invitation and the satisfaction that accompanied it. In The Sacred Harp, the lines of Bonar are paired with the tune I Would See Jesus (No. 75). That tune does not change keys, but does express a sort of vociferous exuberance in the second half of the tune. [Note: the first stanza used in The Sacred Harp is not by Bonar; the linked clip does not include the words by Bonar but will give you an idea what the tune sounds like.]

Horatius Bonar was born at Old Broughton, Edinburgh, Scotland in 1808, the son of James Bonar and Marjory Pyott Maitland. Though a minister and theological writer, he is probably best remembered today as a hymnwriter. Bonar was ordained in the Church of Scotland in 1837, and in 1843 he joined the Free Church of Scotland. Bonar authored Kelso Tracts, Thoughts on Genesis, other books, and numerous works of poetry. He died at his home in Edinburgh on July 31, 1889. Horatius Bonar and his wife Jane Catharine Lundie are buried in the Canongate Churchyard in Edinburgh.

Saturday, September 14, 2024

In other words, mountebanks mountweazeling esquivalience

  • abashed, adjective. Ashamed or embarrassed; disconcerted.
  • colporteur, noun. A peddler of devotional literature, religious books, etc.
  • connoisseur, noun. A person who is especially competent to pass critical judgments in art, or in matters of taste; a discerning judge of the best in any field.
  • dunny, noun. (Australian & New Zealand slang) An outside privy; outhouse.
  • esquivalience. A deliberate or willful avoidance of one’s official responsibilities (but not really, since it is a “mountweazel,” a bogus entry in New Oxford American Dictionary; or perhaps so, since some people have found it defined in a dictionary and now use it in their writing).
  • funicular, noun. A cable railway system ascending a mountain or steep slope.
  • fylfot (also fylfot cross), noun. A cross associated with medieval Anglo-Saxon culture, having perpendicular extensions (usually at 90° or close angles) radiating in the same direction; a swastika (cf. gammadion).
  • gammadion (also gammate cross), noun. A cross figure made by four capital Greek gammas (Γ) radiating from a center; esp., a swastika (cf. fylfot).
  • glossa, noun. The tongue; a tongue-like structure, especially in an insect.
  • glossal, adjective. Of or relating to the tongue.
  • glossarist, noun. A linguist; wordsmith; someone who writes a glossary.
  • glossary, noun. A list of terms in a special subject, field, or area of usage, with accompanying definitions.
  • glossolalia, noun. Incomprehensible speech in an imaginary language, sometimes occurring in a trance state, an episode of religious ecstasy. (Cf. xenoglossia)
  • inane, adjective. Lacking sense, significance, or ideas; silly; empty; void.
  • kvetch, verb. (used without object) To complain, especially chronically.
  • mountebank, noun. A quack; any impudent and unscrupulous pretender; a charlatan.
  • mountweazel, noun. A bogus entry inserted in a reference work by a publisher, allegedly for the purpose of detecting plagiarism.
  • tourtière, noun. A pastry-covered pie containing minced pork or other chopped meat and various chopped vegetables.
  • trefoil, noun. (Latin, trifolium: a three-leaved plant) Any of various plants of the pea family, chiefly of the genera Trifolium and Lotus, having compound trifoliolate leaves; an ornament, symbol, or architectural form having the appearance of a trifoliolate leaf.
  • trifecta, noun. A set or combination of three things.
  • triquetra, noun. A triangular figure composed of three interlaced arcs, or equivalently three overlapping vesicae piscis lens shapes (sometimes called the “Celtic Trinity Knot”).
  • xenoglossia, noun. An ability to speak a known language with which the speaker or speakers are unfamiliar. (Cf. glossolalia)

Friday, September 13, 2024

Universality and unity

I found the following comments saved on my computer. I did not write down the source. I have searched and not found a source. I might have written this, or might have copied and pasted it from somewhere. So I do not want to take credit for it. Nevertheless, I believe it is worth posting.

Jesus is gathering a people for himself from every tribe, tongue, and nation through his new covenant. This people is therefore a racially, linguistically, and geographically diverse people – expressed in local congregations. This doctrine indicates a congregation should recognize other gospel-preaching congregations of like faith and practice as true churches. This additionally implies that a congregation recognizes the members of those other churches as true Christians.

On the one hand, congregations of baptized believers are partners in labor together with God and with one another. On the other hand, the Bible does not prescribe any formal institutional connections or structures between local congregations. The unity is biblical and spiritual rather than organizational.

Thursday, September 12, 2024

Conversions in Acts

APPENDIX I – CONVERSIONS IN ACTS

The conversions in the book of Acts might be studied with benefit, considering the question, “Is there a normative conversion in Acts?” Or, “What is the consistent thread in all the conversion accounts?”

  1. Pentecost Acts 2:38ff
  2. 5000 in Jerusalem Acts 4:4, 32
  3. Multitudes at Solomon’s porch Acts 5:12-14
  4. The Samaritans Acts 8:16
  5. The Eunuch of Ethiopia Acts 8:36-38
  6. Paul Acts 9; 22:16
  7. Cornelius Acts 10:47ff; 11:16-17
  8. The deputy at Paphos Acts 13:4-12
  9. Antioch Pisidia Acts 13:14ff
  10. Lydia? Acts 16:13
  11. Philippian Jailer Acts 16:30-24
  12. Thessalonians Acts 17:1-9
  13. Bereans Acts 17:10ff
  14. Athenians Acts 17:16ff
  15. Corinthians Acts 18:1-11
  16. Apollos Acts 18:24-28
  17. The 12 of Ephesus Acts 19:1-7

Above is possibly a complete list of these accounts (or possible accounts).[i] Did I miss any possibilities? If so, what are they? Thanks.


[i] Possible accounts – for example, Acts 19:1-7 is believed to be so by some. Yet on the other hand, these are called disciples and believers. Or Apollos? Did he not need to only be taught more correctly than what he knew?


Wednesday, September 11, 2024

The Rusk County Baptist History Project

For quite some time, I have had a two-part goal “on the back burner,” so to speak. I wanted to:

  1. Visit every Baptist Church in Rusk County, Texas (my native county).
  2. Compile a history of all the Baptist Churches of Rusk County.

Almost two years into retirement, I concluded it is time to move this to a front burner. In July I began to crank up the “Rusk County History Project.” I have sort of introduced it through the History of Henderson and Rusk County Facebook group, posting pictures that I have taken of church buildings. I kicked it off with picture taking, and by now have taken a picture of every existing Baptist Church building that I know of in this county, most still used and a few abandoned. However, there may be a few I do not know and might have missed. I have developed questionnaires for churches and associations, and hope that every Baptist Church and Baptist organization in Rusk County will consider and decide to participate.

Perhaps you are a Rusk County Baptist reading this, or know one! I am attaching letters and questionnaires to give some idea of what I am doing.

If these links do not work, please let me know. Thanks

Tuesday, September 10, 2024

Scofield Reference Bible and the King James

Q. Does the Scofield Reference Bible and its editor C. I. Scofield support the King James Bible and/or Textus Receptus?

A. The short answer is no.

I have not written much on my blog about C. I. Scofield or his reference Bible, but I can easily be classified as “not a fan.” The Scofield Reference Bible was compiled and edited (with the help of “consulting editors”) by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), a popular American theologian and Bible conference speaker, who is best remembered for his teachings on dispensationalism and eschatology.

The first edition of the the Scofield Reference Bible appeared in 1909, published by the Oxford University Press in Oxford, England. A revised second edition came out in 1917. It is the most popular and best representative of Scofield’s work and theology. In 1967, 46 years after Scofield’s death, Oxford University published a revision of Scofield’s Bible, The New Scofield Reference Bible (edited by E. Schuyler English). It included some updated or modernized words inserted in the King James text, and changed some of the old study notes (which sometimes muted or disputed the notes of Scofield himself). The 21st century saw another edition of the Scofield Bible, with the Scofield reference notes made available in the ESV, HCSB. NASB, NIV, and NKJV in addition to the KJV.[i]

Though Scofield placed his cross references and study notes within the text of the King James Bible, some notes make it apparent that he was committed to textual revision above any support of the King James Bible. His revisionism is quite muted compared to what we see among the text critics of the 21st century. However, he was not committed to the King James text and translation. The following notes demonstrate his position on textual variants, the Greek manuscripts, and the Critical Text.

Matthew 23:14
  • s. The best MSS. omit v. 14.
Mark 16:9
  • 1. The passage from verse 9 to the end is not found in the two most ancient manuscripts, the Sinaitic and Vatican, and others have it with partial omissions and variations. But it is quoted by Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the second or third century.
John 5:3
  • m. The Sinai MS. omits “waiting for the moving of the water,” and all of v. 4.
John 7:53
  • 1. John 7.53-8:11 is not found in some of the most ancient manuscripts. Augustine declares that it was stricken from many copies of the sacred story because of a prudish fear that it might teach immorality! But the immediate context (vs. 12-46), beginning with Christ’s declaration, “I am the light of the world,” seems clearly to have its occasion in the conviction wrought in the hearts of the Pharisees, as recorded in verse 9; as also, it explains the peculiar virulence of the Pharisees’ words (v. 41).
Acts 8:37
  • h. The best authorities omit v. 37.
Hebrews 10:23
  • s. confession of the hope.
1 John 5:7
  • o. It is generally agreed that v. 7 has no real authority, and has been inserted.
The above notes demonstrate that C. I. Scofield was not a proponent of the TR, neither an avid defender of the KJV. However, in contrast to many in the Critical Text camp today, Scofield seems noncommittal on Mark 16:9-20, and seems to support the Pericope Adulterae. There are no notes at Matthew 6:13; Luke 23:34; Ephesians 3:9; Revelation 16:5; 22:19, some verses which are hotly discussed today.

There are additional problems with Scofield and his notes, such as his universalist dispensationalist ecclesiology, and the promotion of the Gap Theory (a long gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2).

Genesis 1:2
  • 3. Jer. 4.23-26, Isa. 24:1 and Isa. 45.18, clearly indicate that the earth had undergone a cataclysmic change as the result of divine judgment. The face of the earth bears everywhere the marks of such a catastrophe. There are not wanting intimations which connect it with a previous testing and fall of angels. See Ezk. 28.12-15 and Isa. 14.9-14, which certainly go beyond the kings of Tyre and Babylon.
The Scofield Reference Bible and its editor C. I. Scofield do not and did not support the King James Bible and/or Textus Receptus. Neither do its past and current publisher.


[i] For more on the history of the Scofield Bible, see Gordon Campbell, Bible: The Story of the King James Version, 1611-2011 (pp. 241-248).

Monday, September 09, 2024

Is it the lifework of a privileged jester?

“…can such trifling, however selfish, compare with his, who, standing up for God in matters which cost the life of Christ and engaged the attention of the three worlds—men, angels and devils—who stands up as Heaven’s agent to dispense terms of life and conditions of pardon, or to denounce eternal judgments, and there poses as a wit or attitudinizes as a rhetorician, or plays the actor, as if the whole service were a theatrical display and heaven and hell were but scenic paintings to accentuate his dramatic talent!

“Therefore, the impression never leaves me that no irreverent man should ever dare preach. I do not care how much he knows, nor how well he can declaim, nor how many his admirers. I shudder—cold chills of apprehension creep over me when I hear him.”

Sunday, September 08, 2024

See, gracious God...

Anne Steele wrote “See, gracious God, before thy throne” for the occasion of a public fast. According to John Julian, this hymn was published in her Poems on Subjects Chiefly Devotional, 1760. The hymn is Common Meter, in seven 4-line stanzas. It is given below as it appears in The Works of Mrs. Anne Steele, Complete in Two Volumes Volume I (Boston, MA: Munroe, Francis, and Parker, 1808).

On the Publick Fast. February 6, 1856.

1. See, gracious God, before thy throne
Thy mourning people bend!
’Tis on thy sovereign grace alone,
Our humble hopes depend.

2. Tremendous judgments from thy hand,
Thy dreadful pow’r display;
Yet mercy spares this guilty land,
And yet we live to pray.

3. Great God, and why is Britain spared,
Ungrateful as we are?
O be these awful warnings heard,
While mercy cries, Forbear.

4. What num’rous crimes increasing rise
O’er all this wretched isle!
What land so favour’d of the skies,
And yet what land so vile!

5. How chang’d, alas! are truths divine.
For error, guilt, and shame!
What impious numbers, bold in sin,
Disgrace the Christian name!

6. O bid us turn, almighty Lord,
By thy resistless grace;
Then shall our hearts obey thy word,
And humbly seek thy face.

7. Then should insulting foes invade,
We shall not sink in fear;
Secure of never-failing aid,
If God, our God, is near.

  • The line “Tremendous judgments from thy hand” has this note attached to it: “* Earthquake at Lisbon, &c.”

The hymn and the associated fast grew out of the events of the Great Lisbon Earthquake of 1755. Will Fitzgerald has written an interesting hymn history titled Earthquake hymn 354t Lebanon.

For more on the earthquake, see Lisbon earthquake of 1755.

For more on Anne Steele, see The Excellency of the Holy Scriptures.

To hear the Sacred Harp song Lebanon, see 354t Lebanon - Second Ireland Sacred Harp Convention, 2012. The Sacred Harp 1991 Edition uses stanzas 1, 5, and 6.

Saturday, September 07, 2024

In other (Sacred Harp) words, abate to zephyr

  • abate, verb. To reduce in amount, degree, or intensity; lessen; diminish.
  • beatific, adjective. Bestowing bliss, blessings, happiness, or the like; blissful, saintly.
  • bower, noun. An attractive dwelling or retreat; a shelter (as in a garden) made with tree boughs or vines twined together.
  • Columbia, noun. The United States.
  • diadem, noun. A crown worn as a sign of royalty.
  • eglantine, noun. The sweetbrier, Rosa rubiginosa; the wild rose or dogrose, Rosa canina.
  • Elysian, noun. Paradise; state of bliss.
  • evergreen, noun. A place always green or verdant.
  • fettered, adjective/verb. Bound; restrained; shackled.
  • gird, verb. To fasten or secure (clothing, for example), or, figuratively, to prepare. 
  • host, noun. An army; a multitude or great number of persons or things.
  • keel, noun. A central fore-and-aft structural member in the bottom of a hull of a ship.
  • myriad, noun. A very great number; large in number.
  • pensively, adverb. With thoughtfulness; with gloomy seriousness or some degree of melancholy.
  • pinions, noun. The wings of a bird.
  • rapture, noun. Ecstatic joy or delight; joyful ecstasy; full of feeling.
  • rapturous, adjective. Filled with or characterized by great joy or rapture; ecstatic.
  • refulgent, adjective. Radiant; gleaming; resplendent; shining brightly and radiantly.
  • seraph, noun. An angel of the first order.
  • seraphic,  adjective. Very beautiful or pure like that of an angel; angelic.
  • superlative, noun. Something of the highest possible excellence; the highest degree.
  • swarmed, verb. (past tense of swarm) To fly or move about together in large numbers.
  • transitory, adjective. Passing without continuance; continuing a short time; fleeting.
  • unbeclouded, adjective. Not obscured with a cloud or clouds; not cloudy.
  • vernal, adjective. Belonging to the spring; appearing in spring.
  • warbler, noun. A singer; a songster.
  • yon/yonder, adjective. Being at a distance within view.
  • zephyr, noun. The west wind; a gentle breeze; a light wind.

Thursday, September 05, 2024

Miracles in Acts

APPENDIX G – MIRACLES IN ACTS

Miracles and wonders in the book of Acts:

 

Miracle                                                  Where Wrought                      Reference

Jesus ascends to heaven                                  Bethany/Mount of Olives       1:9

Gift of tongues                                                Jerusalem                                 2:3

Apostles perform signs and wonders             Jerusalem                                2:43

Peter heals a lame man                                   Jerusalem                                 3:7-11

Earthquake answers prayer                             Jerusalem                                4:31

Ananias and Sapphira struck dead                 Jerusalem                                5:1-10

Apostles perform signs and wonders              Jerusalem                                5:12

Healing in Peter’s shadow                              Jerusalem                                5:15-16

Prison doors opened                                       Jerusalem                                5:19

Stephen’s wonders and miracles                     Jerusalem                                 6:8

Philip’s healing and exorcism                        Samaria                                   8:6-13

Apostles communicate the Holy Ghost          Samaria                                   8:14-17

Saul’s conversion, appearance of Jesus          Road, near Damascus             9:3-9

Saul’s eyes healed                                           Damascus                                9:17-18

Peter heals Aeneas of a palsy                         Lydda                                     9:32-35

Peter raises Tabitha, or Dorcas, to life           Joppa                                       9:36-42

Vision, angelic appearances                          Joppa                                 10:3,7,10,19

Gift of tongues                                                Caesarea                               10:45-46

Peter delivered out of prison by an angel       Jerusalem                                12:7-17

God smites Herod, to die                                Caesarea                               12:21-23

Blinding of a sorcerer Elymas                        Paphos                                     13:6-12

Paul’s signs and wonders                               Iconium                                   14:3-4

Paul heals a cripple                                         Lystra                                      14:8-18

Miracles and wonders                                     Among the Gentiles                15:12

Paul casts out a spirit of divination                Philippi                                   16:16-18

God opens prison doors with earthquake       Philippi                                   16:25-31

Gift of tongues, Holy Ghost                           Ephesus                                   19:1-6

Special miracles by Paul                                Ephesus                                 19:11-12

Paul restores Eutychus to life                         Troas                                       20:8-12

Healing of Paul’s snake-bitten hand               Malta                                       28:3-6

Paul heals the father of Publius and others    Malta                                       28:7-8

Other healings at Malta                                   Malta                                       28:9

 

Miracles and wonders were wrought primarily by the apostles. However, they were not limited to the apostles. See, for example, Acts 6:8 (Stephen), Acts 8:6-7 (Philip), and Acts 15:2 (Barnabas). God effected some directly by without using a human intermediary (e.g. Acts 2:3; 12:23). In church history in the book of Acts, the out-of-the-ordinary spiritual manifestations are most prominent in the early pages of the book, and ebb in the latter pages.

 

“There is a noteworthy correspondence, or parallelism, between the miracles wrought through Peter and those wrought through Paul.”[i]

 

Peter                                                                            Paul

Lame man in temple, 3:2-8                             14:8-10, Healed a cripple

Healed in cities, shadow 5:12,15-16    19:11-12, Miracles in Ephesus, handkerchief

Let out of prison 5:17-21; 12:1-10                 16:22-27, Let out of prison

Dorcas raised 9:36-42                                     20:9-12, Eutychus raised

Received visions, 10:3ff.                                16:9ff., Received visions

 


[i] Companion Bible, Bullinger, p. 1575.

Wednesday, September 04, 2024

Editions and printings of Our Authorized Bible Vindicated

For better or worse, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated by Benjamin George Wilkinson is something of a lightning rod in the Bible versions debate. Wilkinson, Dean of Theology at Washington Missionary College, wrote this defense of the Authorized (or King James) Bible in 1930 due to the denominational promotion of the American Standard Version of the Bible amongst the Seventh-day Adventists. Because of the place it holds in the Bible versions debates (though not always accurately and honestly portrayed), I thought it worthwhile to try to gather a list of editions and printings of Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. This is a start, based on two books I have, what is listed at WorldCat.org, and printings for sale or otherwise mentioned online. I decided to also include electronic versions I found. If you know of additions or corrections, please let me know.


First edition
No publisher listed. Washington, District of Columbia, June 1930. 258 pages

Reprints
Bible For Today, Collinswood, New Jersey 1984
Burnside Press, Sydney, Australia 1979-1985?
Leaves of Autumn, Payson, Arizona (paperback) 1982, 1988, 1990, 1993, 1996. 258 pages
TEACH Services, [retypeset] Brushton, New York (paperback) 2006, 2014. 158 pages

Part 2 in Which Bible, by David Otis Fuller [retypeset] (paperback) 1970, et al. pp. 174-318

Online
At 4eAnge.com
At Internet Archive
At SabdaMedia.Org
From TemCat.com (archived)


Tuesday, September 03, 2024

Are you indirectly but definitely lying, Mark?

“I don’t toss around the word lie lightly. But I’ve decided that this repeated failure to mention the important fact of the new King James is based on the TR along with the uncertain sound that King James Onlyists make about its textual basis when they actually do talk about it all of this – taken all together – amounts to an indirect but still definite lie.” (Mark Ward, starting about 33:27 in his talk “Is the NKJV Truly Based on the TR.”)

Who’s lying?

Mark may not toss “lie” about lightly, but he certainly tosses it about, sometimes wrongly.

Mark admitted that there “were places where Kent [Brandenburg] successfully showed that the New King James did not follow the same edition of the TR as the King James.”[i] However, Mark replies that he “was able to show that they did follow other TRs.”

Mark also admitted there were “three passages that Kent found where the new King James appeared to go with the critical text and I could not find a TR edition that had that reading.” He again says, there are “only three places in the New Testament where the new King James could be said fairly to follow critical text readings.” He quickly follows this up with an incorrect assertion: “the New King James translators said they used the traditional text for the New Testament; they didn’t say they used a specific edition of the TR.” Yes, they did say they followed Scrivener (and Bomberg).[ii]

Repurposing Mark Ward’s charge against KJV Defenders over to NKJV Defenders:

“I don’t toss around the word lie lightly. But, this repeated failure to admit the important fact that New King James sometimes departs from the Scrivener TR readings, along with the uncertain sound that New King James Defenders make about these variations when they do talk about it – all of this taken altogether amounts to an indirect but still definite lie.”

Would Mark be willing to repurpose his charge against Tom Brennan and Charles Surrett of indirectly lying to Farstad, Price, Thomas Nelson Publishers, and others? As a group they said they followed the F. H. A. Scrivener text, but they did not always do so. Is Mark willing to point the finger back at himself? He has said the NKJV translators only claimed to use the TR, but they actually claimed more than that.

Five Mark reasons.

In his video “Is the NKJV Truly Based on the TR,” Mark Ward gives five reasons that the New King James translation is “based on” the Textus Receptus (traditional Greek text). I have copied the reasons from the transcript of his video and cleaned them up a bit to make the points easier to read. If he objects to the way they are stated, Mark can let me know.

1. The New King James translators say that their New Testament is based on the Textus Receptus. [rlv: no, they are more specific; in the publisher’s own words, the translators “agreed to follow the Greek text developed by Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener.”]

2. Some King James Defenders acknowledge that the New King James is based on the Textus Receptus. [rlv: such an acknowledgement still allows that they sometimes depart from the source the translation is “based on.”]

3. The big three passages mentioned regularly by all King James Defenders (Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11; 1 John 5:7-8) are all present (and without brackets) in the New King James Version. [rlv: so far as I know, no one has ever disputed this point, which simply shows they are following the TR or at least Byzantine text rather than critical text in those places.]

4. A sampling of five significant (Acts 8:37; John 1:18; John 5:4; 1 Timothy 3:16; Matthew 17:21) and ten random variants (Revelation 18:6; Revelation 3:8; Mark 10:2; John 15:26; Luke 21:39; John 16:10; Matthew 27:22; Matthew 25:20; Ephesians 3:14; Matthew 19:3) match the Textus Receptus. Mark says “I could go on and on. I could do more random sampling. I surely could – dozens, hundreds of places. How much do I have to do...” [rlv: However, such “random sampling” only applies to those who refuse to admit the NKJV is “based on” the TR. It really does not touch the argument that there are some places where it is not.]

5. In the very rare cases when King James Onlyists have named specific passages in which the new King James readings are allegedly based on the critical text, they are almost always simply wrong. [rlv: wrong according to Mark.]

“Based on” – in this context means finds a foundation in or basis for; that is, has the TR as its bottom. Based on here allows for the traditional texts to be the basis of the NKJV, while allowing for departures. Mark admits as much at when he says there are places the NKJV follows “other TRs,” and in 3 places seems to follow Critical Text readings.[iii]

“Follows” – in this context means something like – to conform to, comply with; to imitate or copy; use as an exemplar.

My view.

  • I believe the New King James translation is generally and mostly based on the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts.
  • I believe the New King James translation has some readings that do not follow the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts.

By this, I mean that the NKJV translators used the traditional texts as their textual basis. Additionally, they claim specific texts in the Hebrew and Greek as their textual basis – the 1525 Daniel Bomberg Hebrew text and the 1881/1894 F. H. A. Scrivener Greek text. However, there are times they depart from their basis and follow something else. I have not personally researched the Old Testament, so I will leave this argument to others.[iv] I have personally checked various readings in the Greek New Testament. At times they follow a different TR, and sometime they follow the Critical Text (and sometimes the “different TR” reading may match at CT reading against the Scrivener text).

I do not toss this word around lightly, but I believe Mark is indirectly but definitely lying – by his own construction of what indirectly definitely lying is. What’s good for the goose in good for the gander.

-----

Post script.

1. In his first point in the video, Mark says we are to believe that the New King James is based on Textus Receptus because the NKJV translators say that their New Testament is based on the TR.

2. In his dealing with TR supporters, Mark shows we are not to believe that TR supporters are TR supporters just because they say they are TR supporters.

Notice two opposite and completely different approaches. 1. Believe what they say against any evidence to the contrary. 2. Don’t believe what they say and try to find evidence that is contrary. Why? Probably simply because using the different approaches will agree with his conclusions.[v]


[i] This discussion goes back to Kent’s list that Mark discussed on his blog back in August 2019. In the video Mark says there were three passages that Kent found where the new King James appeared to go with the critical text and he could not find a TR Edition that had that reading. Of course, even looking for another TR reading is a tacit admission they did not always use the Scrivener text as they said. The verses are: Colossians 3:17; Jude v. 3; 2 John v. 7. He goes into the different possibilities and lands on the third option he gives: “the New King James translators told the truth and their apparent deviations from the TR are due to the exigencies of translation style.”

[ii] “Preface,” p. vi

“For the New King James Version the text used was the 1967/1977 Stuttgart edition of Biblia Hebraica, with frequent comparisons being made with the Bomberg edition of 1524-25. The Septuagint (Greek) Version of the Old Testament and the Latin Vulgate were consulted. In addition to referring to a variety of ancient version of the Hebrew Scriptures, the New King James Version also draws on the resources of relevant manuscripts from the Dead Sea Caves. In the few places where the Hebrew is so obscure that the King James followed one of the versions, but where information is now available to resolve the problems, the New King James Version follows the Hebrew text. Significant variations are recorded in the footnotes.”

From “A New King James Version,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” Holy Bible, The New King James Version, pp. 1233-35.

“In translating the Old Testament, the New King James Version used the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 1976-77 Edition, edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph. As an additional reference they used the Second Bomberg Edition of the Hebrew Bible.” p. 1234

“While the New Testament scholars were free to consult any available Greek text, and they did so, each agreed to follow the Greek text developed by Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener. This text, originally published by Cambridge University Press, reconstructed as closely as possible the Greek text underlying the King James Version.”

“A New King James Version,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” Holy Bible, The New King James Version, p. 1234.

Part of the revision process is described this way:

“Each scholar worked privately, and recommended changes in the King James text. In his work he used the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (for the Old Testament) or the Scrivener Greek Text (for the New Testament) and a copy of the 1611 King James Version as revised in 1769 (the edition in general use today).”

“A New King James Version,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” Holy Bible, The New King James Version, pp. 1235.

[iii] Mark really gives an uncertain sound here, sometimes seeming to admit a few departures, but at other times explaining them away.

[iv] I do not mean I have never looked at it, but that generally I have read what others wrote about it rather than making detailed investigations myself.

[v] In the video Mark, on the side of those who claim they accept the “evidence” and that the other side does not, rejects the evidence and emphasizes we must believe the NKJV translators told the truth about basing their translation on the TR. I have no problem with that, as long as it can be admitted that sometimes they deviated from their basis – which they did! There is evidence that they did, and the simplest explanation is that they did. I leave the motives to others to worry about. Sometimes their translation comes out more closely matching the CT rather than the TR, however you slice it.

Funny though. (Funny strange, not funny ha-ha.) Mark greatly emphasizes believing what the translators said and accepting that as the final word. Yet, he fails to apply this principle when talking about others. Why does he not accept what TR people say as the truth that they are not KJVO? Instead, he looks for evidence that they are not telling the truth. For example, he says the fact that they won’t use the NKJV is evidence they are King James Only rather than TR Defenders. He has made that charge several times against Confessional Bibliologists (Jeff Riddle, for example). Then he complains when people look at evidence concerning the NKJV. Consistency is not a jewel that Mark wears.