New International PerVersion

[lukecash12]

We've covered this in some previous threads on the KJV and the KJV-Only controversy. I'm with Dr. James White on this issue, in which he clearly explains why KJV-Onlyism is not a sound, logical or sane position to take, because of the facts of history and the rules of textual-criticism. I share a host of his videos in the 'KJV to NKJV translation problem' thread...here, here, here, here & here.

~*~*~

Also some good older KJV Only resource sites -

The KJV Only Issue

List of articles by author

~*~*~

Anyone can research this issue for themselves and see that the KJV Only position is indefensible.

What's really odd to me, is how many Baptists there are that support the KJV only. Who do they think the English Baptists were fleeing from, when they all went to the Deutschland?

 

[freelight]

Issues...........

Issues...........

I can only speculate as to why you have chosen Dr. White as your chosen authority concerning the Textus Receptus and the Massoretic texts but I would be more than happy to discuss the matter at length should you be a little more receptive to that offer than you were my offer to publicly discuss the history of Theosophy.

I've still got lots of reading/research to do on the history of Theosophy, and have some of the standard works of Blavatsky and William Q Judge on my reading list at the moment, besides how the basic principles are in harmony with the Perennial Wisdom in general espoused in many religious traditions. I only identify as a 'theosophist' in a most liberal/general sense, a lover of 'divine wisdom' agreeing with many of the universal tenets espoused in Theosophy, but am not limited to the Theosohical Society of course, it just represents one primary school or movement in time. I've been meaning to learn the original teachings of Blavatsky and her most trusted associates, seeing how these differ from the Neo-Theosophy of later successors such as Beasant and Leadbeater. Granted the volumes produced in this school are numerous, it would take life-times to grasp it all, let alone the entire library of esoteric wisdom found elsewhere.

But back to the KJV Only issue -

I just happen to agree with James White on the KJV Only issue so far (I've not read his entire book yet), as well as many other Christians (I don't claim is a the only or sole authority on the subject) .I find it ridiculous to hold an extreme KJV Only position, like folks such as Ruckman or Gail Riplinger with her outlandish book "New Age Bible Versions". - its a 3-ring circus IMO. Granted, I use my Thomas Nelson giant print center-column reference for my study bible, knowing it uses mainly the TR manuscripts as well, but has footnotes for the variant manuscript readings too. Good to be informed on ALL variant readings. - that's my opinion.

 

[fzappa13]

I've still got lots of reading/research to do on the history of Theosophy, and have some of the standard works of Blavatsky and William Q Judge on my reading list at the moment, besides how the basic principles are in harmony with the Perennial Wisdom in general espoused in many religious traditions. I only identify as a 'theosophist' in a most liberal/general sense, a lover of 'divine wisdom' agreeing with many of the universal tenets espoused in Theosophy, but am not limited to the Theosohical Society of course, it just represents one primary school or movement in time. I've been meaning to learn the original teachings of Blavatsky and her most trusted associates, seeing how these differ from the Neo-Theosophy of later successors such as Beasant and Leadbeater. Granted the volumes produced in this school are numerous, it would take life-times to grasp it all, let alone the entire library of esoteric wisdom found elsewhere.

Ms. Blavatsky was the only honorary female 32nd degree Freemason that I am aware of and this is your first hint as to the common nature of the "mysteries" that both Freemasonry and Theosophy hold dear. HPB and Annie were both recruited by Annie's brother Walter, himself a 33rd degree Freemason and one of the founders of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge created to more accurately document the history of Freemasonry.

One might rightly point to Leadbeater's writing as being derivative but not the Beasants ... they along with HPB, Albert Pike and Giuseppe Mazzini were the source from which Theosophy was born ... if one is to discount the antiquity of the notions they espoused and their author.

But back to the KJV Only issue -

I just happen to agree with James White on the KJV Only issue so far (I've not read his entire book yet),

It is hard to avoid the notion that your studies are routinely incomplete and that should eventually beg the question "why?" Do you read far enough to see what you want to and then stop?

 

[freelight]

One is a student for life,....there's always room for learning more....

One is a student for life,....there's always room for learning more....

It is hard to avoid the notion that your studies are routinely incomplete and that should eventually beg the question "why?" Do you read far enough to see what you want to and then stop?

I haven't had the time or resources to get White's book if your speaking of this instance,....as far as other studies, I read as much as I can, and continue as I'm able. I don't agree with your presumption above that I'm just reading what I want on a subject but try to look at all the data available on the subject, for that would be the logical thing to do. So far in my research, I see no justification for an extreme or hyper KJV Only position, for while it is a good translation (within its contextual possibilities), its not perfect and limited to only a certain family of manuscripts. My earlier reference to KJVOnly "nuts" still holds, and its only for those extremists on this issue, whose zeal to exalt the KJV as the one and only perfect 'word of God', is unnecessary and misguided IMO.

 

[freelight]

Ms. Blavatsky was the only honorary female 32nd degree Freemason that I am aware of and this is your first hint as to the common nature of the "mysteries" that both Freemasonry and Theosophy hold dear. HPB and Annie were both recruited by Annie's brother Walter, himself a 33rd degree Freemason and one of the founders of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge created to more accurately document the history of Freemasonry.

One might rightly point to Leadbeater's writing as being derivative but not the Beasants ... they along with HPB, Albert Pike and Giuseppe Mazzini were the source from which Theosophy was born ... if one is to discount the antiquity of the notions they espoused and their author.

Yes, Madame Blavatsky is an extraordinary woman, doing amazing things for a woman back in her day, a pioneer, visionary, prophetess in a way, serving as the scribe for the masters. My main interest are the principles of Theosophy first, and how they relate to other esoteric schools of wisdom, the common thread in all these teachings. There are still those who contend that Annie Beasant and C. W. Leadbeater did deviate from Blavatsky's teachings somewhat, being a form of 'neo-theosophy', but this for me is still a matter of study. Also Alice Bailey's work is a branch in the 'neo-theosophical' vein. Taking up the seminal works like 'Isis Unveiled' & 'The Secret Doctrine' is quite a task, seeing how large these volumes are. Anyways,...this deserves its own thread, which I'm not quite ready to create at this time. Perhaps we should attend to the thread subject

I do recall using the NIV in my earlier years for some bible study, I see nothing wrong with it, as long as I compare translations and the variable manuscript readings. These efforts by some like Gail Riplinger to judge all other translations but the KJV as 'satanic' is frivolous. Btw, James White did an interview with her on radio (I believe its on Youtube) in the early days, and gave her the right act. I don't believe she's made herself available to debate him since.

 

[fzappa13]

Yes, Madame Blavatsky is an extraordinary woman, doing amazing things for a woman back in her day, a pioneer, visionary, prophetess in a way, serving as the scribe for the masters. My main interest are the principles of Theosophy first, and how they relate to other esoteric schools of wisdom, the common thread in all these teachings. There are still those who contend that Annie Beasant and C. W. Leadbeater did deviate from Blavatsky's teachings somewhat, being a form of 'neo-theosophy', but this for me is still a matter of study. Also Alice Bailey's work is a branch in the 'neo-theosophical' vein. Taking up the seminal works like 'Isis Unveiled' & 'The Secret Doctrine' is quite a task, seeing how large these volumes are. Anyways,...this deserves its own thread, which I'm not quite ready to create at this time. Perhaps we should attend to the thread subject

I've read Isis Unveiled and the Secret Doctrine as well and can attest that they are slow going for the "uninitiated". Stated briefly, they are another take on the Gnostic traditions with a few innovations ... the notion of her access to "the masters" being one of them ... said masters most likely being Pike, Mazzini and (Walter) Beasant. It would be doing her efforts a disservice to quickly summate them so briefly but those of us who pay attention to such things can't help but take note of her allegiance to "Lucifer" the light bearer so beloved by her mentor Albert Pike. I mean, when you call your magazine "Lucifer" you're pretty much asking for it.

Ms. Bailey is indeed derivative and yet an unabashed fan of HPB. I have to admit that, at the risk of sounding conspiratorial, I soon wearied of her continual references to "the New World Order" and came to discount her as yet another shill for those seeking global governance. I mean, when your mailing address is the U.N. plaza it doesn't do much for your credibility with those inclined to take note of such things.

It's a pity you don't see such cornerstones of your beliefs as worthy of their own thread but then again it wouldn't be the first time someone has shied away from such scrutiny. Few of us are up to the task for whatever reason.

I do recall using the NIV in my earlier years for some bible study, I see nothing wrong with it, as long as I compare translations and the variable manuscript readings. These efforts by some like Gail Riplinger to judge all other translations but the KJV as 'satanic' is frivolous. Btw, James White did an interview with her on radio (I believe its on Youtube) in the early days, and gave her the right act. I don't believe she's made herself available to debate him since.

I think the efforts of Mr. White and Ms. Riplinger to be somewhat overstated which is ever the want of the zealous. I would also add that each has their point but, like Walter Martin and Ms. O'Hair before them, I fear their points were lost in the midst of the spectacle they came to be. Textual criticism is work, any way you slice it, and is not work soon embraced by those predisposed to a particular outcome to that affair.

 

[kiwimacahau]

I've always used the KJV its the one i started with and its the one I'll finish with. Its been under attack from day one, here's a page called the 1611 King James Bible Defended, one article tells how the modern versions pervert salvation, well, that's what its all about anyhow isn't it, our salvation.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/1611_authorized_king_james.htm


everready

What a crock! David Stewart wouldn't know the truth if it bit him on the backside.

 

[freelight]

One last tangent here, then back to the thread subject

One last tangent here, then back to the thread subject

I've read Isis Unveiled and the Secret Doctrine as well and can attest that they are slow going for the "uninitiated".

Super. I've dipped into a few theosophical pools so to speak, but am certainly ever learning. My affiliation as a 'theosophist' is primarily in philosophical orientation and agreement with many of their principles (however this doesn't mean every aspect of the teaching, as I have my own views/interpreations or claims of 'agnosis' about certain things).

Stated briefly, they are another take on the Gnostic traditions with a few innovations ... the notion of her access to "the masters" being one of them ... said masters most likely being Pike, Mazzini and (Walter) Beasant.

I don't know about that, as I've yet to read more on Blavatsky, the biographies written about her, the historical details behind her life and the Theosophical Society.

It would be doing her efforts a disservice to quickly summate them so briefly but those of us who pay attention to such things can't help but take note of her allegiance to "Lucifer" the light bearer so beloved by her mentor Albert Pike. I mean, when you call your magazine "Lucifer" you're pretty much asking for it.

I chuckle a bit on that one on her part, because she knew full well about possible repercussions of naming her magazine 'Lucifer', to the uninformed and mostly those bound by traditional Christian mythology an dogma. I've read a few of her articles from her magazine, some brilliant stuff - also her explanation of the naming of the magazine. It has nothing to with anything 'satanic'. Remember, 'God' is LIGHT.

I have no problems with the 'term' or 'name' Lucifer, since it means 'light-bearer', 'luminous one', 'daystar', 'morningstar', etc. (even if we assume Lucifer although a great luminous one, rebelled against God and is now fallen awaiting judgment). We've had a thread on Lucifer, no longer extant where we hash out the 'Lucifer/satan' connection. We ought note as well, that Jesus is also called the 'morning star', and disciples are promised a 'morning star' if they overcome, which we could give various figurative meanings to

Ms. Bailey is indeed derivative and yet an unabashed fan of HPB. I have to admit that, at the risk of sounding conspiratorial, I soon wearied of her continual references to "the New World Order" and came to discount her as yet another shill for those seeking global governance. I mean, when your mailing address is the U.N. plaza it doesn't do much for your credibility with those inclined to take note of such things.

Yes,...her stuff definitely promotes a 'new world order', also note the publishing name was at least on one time 'Lucifer trust', I think changed to 'Lucis Trust'? The 'Great Invocation' is kind of a cool prayer.

It's a pity you don't see such cornerstones of your beliefs as worthy of their own thread but then again it wouldn't be the first time someone has shied away from such scrutiny. Few of us are up to the task for whatever reason.

Oh, I have no problems with creating a thread,...most of my older threads were deleted in the periodic system purges, and don't have any of my usual note except my 'Return To Oneness' thread, which is on universal unity, where I've shared some theosophical material, especially one of the 3 propositions of the essential unity of all things.

If I did begin a thread on 'Theosophy', it would be an introduction on its main principles, resource links and my own small summary and guidelines for the thread. One of the problems/challenges is though (as I've learned from the past) is the response by those critics and ignorant folk who may seek to hijack, troll and muddy the thread with pre-judgments, aspersions and assumptions, and not take the subject seriously with respect to having a civil, intelligent dialogue.

I know in an 'open forum' you cant control who posts, but it becomes for me a tedious job of constantly correcting misrepresentations and other foolishness, when real discussion wanes, and mostly trolls take over. - I gather you might agree with some of these sentiments, that is if you've experienced such. Also, granted this is a predominantly conservative Christian forum with an open bias, with plenty of 'bible thumpers' ready to blast or report 'blasphemies'

I think the efforts of Mr. White and Ms. Riplinger to be somewhat overstated which is ever the want of the zealous. I would also add that each has their point but, like Walter Martin and Ms. O'Hair before them, I fear their points were lost in the midst of the spectacle they came to be. Textual criticism is work, any way you slice it, and is not work soon embraced by those predisposed to a particular outcome to that affair.

Riplinger's work has been proved riddled with misrepresentations, and from what I've seen from the more extreme KJV Only folks, is bibliolatry and ridiculousness (trying to be kind). Its pretty practical,...some modern version Bibles offer a better more complete manuscript presentation for their translations, and any Bible student can afford themselves of the best available texts (variant readints) to do comparisons to come up with the best probable rendering of a passage. Do your homework and choose the best bible for yourself. This goes for any religious writing.

To respect this thread, if you'd like to further correspond, PM me,...for ideas about a new thread on Theosophy,...explore some tentative formats, etc.

 

[Bright Raven]

People always need something to complain about.

 

[freelight]

People always need something to complain about.

I find 'dialogue' much more interesting