News about God

We Believers

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:43:46 -0400

A believer is a disciple of Jesus Christ. “To believe” means to understand the Gospel of Jesus, and as a result of this understanding, to start doing the Will of the Father. Jesus called His beginners, His new converts, “children”.
After many years of training the disciples became mature. “Perfect” was the word that Paul the apostle used.

The disciple, starts as a child, and matures to being made perfect by God. This is what you must become: a mature “perfect” disciple.
Though you cannot make yourself perfect any more than you can make yourself holy or righteous, all things are possible with God.
“But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.” Mt 19:26.

So no more whining that you can never be perfect, or that you are as good as you can ever be. God may accept you as you are at first, but He wills you to change, to become like Jesus. That’s why He called you. And If He has called you it was so that you would try to become like Jesus.
If you have been called; God gives you the faith to receive His grace. If you accept His grace, you should begin to notice a change in your priorities, and a difference in how you behave towards others.

It will help your understanding of the Gospel of Jesus by doing some of the things Jesus did in the Gospels. Doing these things makes the grace that God has given you become apparent to others, and soon you will not have to force this behavior, as it will become natural behavior for you. These are some examples of good works.

Jesus was prejudiced towards no-one.
He was always at peace with friend or foe.
He often had meals with His brethren - apostles and disciples.
He talked mostly about Our Father.

Prejudice

Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:25:34 -0400

Judging
Oh, how hard it is not to judge people we meet, or hear about! Prejudice means to jump to conclusions based upon someone’s name, title, job, or behavior. Prejudice stops any attempt to understand the person.

Jesus called Himself “son of man” so that no-one could be prejudiced against Him. No-one had any idea what son of man meant. If Jesus had called Himself Son of God (BarAbbas in Aramaic), He would have been stoned! Names in the Bible always have a history or hidden meaning, The thief Barabbas, for instance. His name means son of the Father.
You will be surprised when I tell you that in the earliest manuscripts his name was Jesus Barabbas - or Jesus son of the father. What ideas are in your head now about this man? And you nothing about him! The great 3rd. cent. theologian Origen thought that this name was unsuitable for such a sinner as this man, so he removed the man’s first name from his translation, and that change was adopted by the Church.

Prejudice
Today, your name and title, or job title, instantly classify you. People are prejudiced the minute they know what you do. Suddenly you are not Jones the Plumber who is a good Christian, but are one of those people who overcharge householders for simple repairs. Whatever people think about you, it probably has nothing to do with who you really are.

By anonymity Jesus could mix with the multitudes and heal them, but when He went home, the people in the village knew Him as a carpenter, and the son of Joseph - he was not even the son of a priest, as John the Baptist had been. It was this prejudice - this unwillingness to understand him - that prevented them from receiving the Faith from God that would manifest Jesus to them and show who He really was. And so they could not be healed.

So, when you meet someone, before you ask them anything, even a name, talk to them and try to understand who they are and look into your own feelings and see if there is any prejudice lurking there. Make a point of talking about God, and what you have experienced, and see what is the response. Give the person a good opportunity to talk about himself. Make it difficult for him to talk about his work or his relationships by interrupting the conversation if it leads that way. Hopefully you will walk away feeling that you have met a nice person who is on the way to becoming a disciple before you hear from others that the person is a lawyer, or a Bishop in plain clothes.

God has said to us all that it is God who will judge man, and that in the Kingdom of Heaven man will not judge man. The Kingdom of heaven is here with us and God will bring you into the Kingdom of Heaven as soon as you are ready to listen.

Jesus said “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:” (Mt 7:7)

Again, on prejudice: if a man in the street begs for money, give him something before you can make any judgement about him and what he might do with the money, keep five dollars always handy, so you don’t have to fumble which might give you time to become prejudiced.
Jesus said “Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.” Mt 5:42. Jesus did not place any conditions on this action.

The spiritual truth behind this is: As soon as you show prejudice, you stop trying to understand your brethren, and this hampers your discipleship. This is true about the text also. If when you come to the Bible you have a preconceived idea of what a passage might mean, and you do not allow the Holy Spirit to guide you to an understanding, then you are not likely to find the truth that is is the passage. Your prejudice prevents you from receiving understanding from God.

Jesus’s parables often were traps laid to manifest prejudice in the hearts of its hearers. The Good Samaritan is the best example: almost all hearers judge the Priest and Levite to be bad men. The hearer abandons any attempt to understand the behavior of the Priest or the Levite, and does not look into his own heart to see why he is so prejudiced. Jesus did not judge them, the lawyer did not judge them. Who was it in your past that taught you to condemn the behavior of the Priest and levite?

Anger

Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:26:30 -0400

Anger
You cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven if there is any hate or anger in your heart. You cannot receive forgiveness from God, unless you have forgiven all trespasses against you - this means that you have forgotten them.

Virtue

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:07:33 -0400

Jesus said: “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” Mt 7:20.

The fruits of the spirit are the virtues, and these determine how a disciple will behave. When a disciple exhibits all the virtues it is said that he has Christ within him.

St. Augustine in his book Commentary on the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount on page 192 listed the fruit of the spirit as:
Charity.
Joy
Peace
Patience
Kindness
Goodness
Faith
Modesty
Continency

If anyone lacks any of these virtues, then it cannot be said that Christ is within him, for these virtues are Christ as Origen said.

(In Philosophy the seven virtues are: Faith, Hope and Charity, Prudence, Justice, Temperance and Courage). See also St. Augustine on Virtue on this web site.

Charity
Now the spiritual virtue called charity does not mean alms giving, nor service to the poor, but is

“the third and greatest of the Divine virtues enumerated by St. Paul (1 Corinthians 13:13),... defined: a divinely infused habit, inclining the human will to cherish God for his own sake above all things, and man for the sake of God.(1) Its origin, by Divine infusion.

"The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost" (Romans 5:5). It is, therefore, distinct from, and superior to, the inborn inclination or the acquired habit of loving God in the natural order. Theologians agree in saying that it is infused together with sanctifying grace, to which it is closely related either by way of real identity, as some few hold, or, according to the more common view, by way of connatural emanation. .. (5) Its range, i.e., both God and man. While God alone is all lovable, yet, inasmuch as all men, by grace and glory, either actually share or at least are capable of sharing in the Divine goodness, it follows that supernatural love rather includes than excludes them, according to Matt., xxii, 39, and Luke, x, 27. Hence one and the same virtue of charity terminates in both God and man, God primarily and man secondarily.
...
When the three factors are combined, they give rise to complicated rules, the principal of which are these:

1. The love of complacency and the love of benefaction do not follow the same standard, the former being guided by the worthiness, the latter by the nearness and need, of the neighbour.
2. Our personal salvation is to be preferred to all else. We are never justified in committing the slightest sin for the love of any one or anything whatsoever, nor should we expose ourselves to spiritual danger except in such cases and with such precautions as would give us a moral right to, and guarantee of, God's protection.
3. We are bound to succour our neighbour in extreme spiritual necessity even at the cost of our own life, an obligation which, however supposes the certainty of the neighbour's need and of the effectiveness of our service to him.
4. Except in the very rare cases described above, we are not bound to risk life or limb for our neighbour, but only to undergo that amount of inconvenience which is justified by the neighbour's need and nearness. Casuists are not agreed as to the right to give one's life for another's life of equal importance. “ CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Love http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09397a.htm

Meaning behind the Text

Tue, 1 Jan 2008 01:16:12 -0500

God’s ideas, his teachings, were given to the Prophets and Apostles spiritually, and the Prophets and Apostles tried to explain in their own language what these spiritual ideas were.
Often there was no word to describe what the Apostle knew in his heart was the meaning of God’s inspiration, and so new words had to be created to encapsulate an idea.
The spiritual meaning of the words was in the mind of the Apostle. The Apostles explanation held the clues to the meaning of the words. After the Apostles were all dead, the Evangelists tried to capture the spiritual understanding of the Apostles by creating memorable stories, parables, anecdotes, etc. and by offering multiple explanation of the same idea.

The Church Fathers knew that it was not the words that were truth, but the spiritual message underlying those words that was the truth.

The question for us is how do we find the original spiritual message from God that is hidden in the words written in the Bible, or how can we begin to understand the mind of the evangelist who wrote them?

Let us step back a minute and consider a parallel problem in art. the painter has an idea he wants to express. He must paint his picture so that the viewer understands his idea, so in the picture he lays down paint clues - color, hue, lightness, objects that seem out of place or distorted, all of which create an impression, a feeling that is hopefully what the artist was trying to explain to us. At first glance the painting seems simple and understandable, but with continued meditation the viewer begins to see a deeper meaning.
And so it is with the writers of the Gospel of Jesus, who have littered the text with clues to the deeper spiritual meaning that was the intention of God. But this spiritual meaning cannot be understood intellectually, for a spiritual truth must be discerned by the “heart” and “mind” (the name the apostles used to mean the communications center of the spirit).

You must shut out the world and shut down conscious intellectual activity, with all its distractions. Then the mind can be made ready to receive the spiritual instruction of the Holy Spirit who “writes”, for God the Father, the “laws” onto our “heart”.
Of course, after you receive the idea - the inspiration - you still have to convert it into language so that you can act on it, and so that you can pass the idea on to others. And here is why it is so important to have the best Bible translation, for the words on the page, if they represent the original language well, will suddenly have new meaning, and you will be enlightened. And you will be astonished at the spiritual meaning preserved in these heretofore unfathomable sentences.

Choosing a Bible

Fri, 14 Dec 2007 22:42:52 -0500

For audio program on the history of the English Bibles click here Bible Choices.

One of the first things you must do is to begin reading scripture in its earliest form. There are English translations of the Bible as it was from the beginning. You need to know that since about 1860, many Bibles were written and printed for profit, sometimes by people who were not classically trained in the original languages of the Manuscripts.
As a result there is a mishmash of different teaching, much of it quite contrary to what Jesus taught the apostles. To make matters even worse, some Bibles have commentary made to “push” a particular churches agenda, and these notes might distract you from the truth.

Before 1860 most Bibles preached the same theology. You can pick up Bibles from the 16th. cent in Barnes and Noble or Books a Million, and compare them with the standard US printed King James Bible (1769 was the last revision) or the Roman Catholic English translation of the Vulgate (Douay Rheims Bible 16th cent. still in print at Catholic bookstores) , and you will see the same core statements of the Gospel of Jesus.

I know that some people say that it is hard to read the KJV, but there are modern printings that use the exact words of the KJV except that archaic words have been modernized. I am thinking here of The Sword Bible and The 21st. Century King James version . Both are easier to read, and neither changes the theology.

Did you know that the reason for the differences between Bibles texts is primarily due to copyright issues. You see, no-one can copy the Authorized Version (King James) Bible, unless the copyright holder (the Crown of England) gives permission. Cambridge University Press is one of the Queen’s printers that is authorized “by letters patent” to print the Authorized Version.

Outside the U.K., printers copy portions of the Bible without permission and in violation of copyright. But the Crown does not prosecute them. Most US printed “King James Version” Bibles are truly a version of the King James Bible and not an exact copy.
Most USA “King James version” Bibles are missing the books of the Apocrypha, the translators notes, notes to the reader, and calculations of Holy Days. The only printer in the USA to produce an exact copy of the original 1611 Authorized Version is Hendricksen Publishers. But please note that there are many printing errors in the 1611 version, so don’t depend on it for general study - though it is nice to see it in its original layout with chapter headings, and brief summaries. Instead use a current printing of the KJV. The best is the Cambridge Paragraph Bible which seems to have eliminated all the printing errors and minor changes since 1611, and purports to be as close to the original translation as possible. But it costs $80. So the next best is a KJV published by Cambridge, which is the 1769 version including all 80 books of the Bible.

The benefit of using a Bible endorsed and approved by the Head of the Church is enormous. The King James Authorized Version was approved by the ArchBishop, the King (James), later Sovereigns, and the Parliament. No changes can be made to the Bible without authorization by all these people - and none have ever been approved.

On the Catholic side, the Pope has approved only the Vulgate for use within the Church. It is a Latin translation made in the 5th. century. And there is an English translation of the Vulgate called the Duoay-Rheims.
No other Bible has been approved by the Vatican.

In order, however, to tap into the lucrative market for Bibles, publishing houses have commissioned their own translations of source material (usually from two Greek MSS, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus ), and have called their publication a Bible, though none of them have not been endorsed by the head of the Church. They are in fact mostly the production of students and teachers at various seminaries, and Universities.

Just look at the names and affiliations of the translators listed in the front of the Bibles. Some Bible publishers seem to be embarrassed with this disclosure and so have removed it from the Bible - though you can search for it on the internet.

Prayer Book
In the English Church, the official Book of Common Prayer 1662 version (no other is officially recognized by the Church of England), quotes bible passages taken from the Great Bible (approved by the Bishops of the CofE inthe 16th. cent.), and the Authorized Version.
Although other prayer books are in general use in both the USA and England, their use is considered experimental. There is much antagonism to the use of these experimental versions within the Anglican Communion, and more than 70 percent of the Bishops consider them as not representing their beliefs. The Episcopal Church in the USA uses a 1976 revision in which much text has been removed.

The 1928 Edition of the prayer book is very much like the original version of the BCP, but was not approved for use in England, though the Anglican Catholic Church uses it, and some other churches in the Anglican Communion use it occasionally. In September 2007, the churches that are part of the organization “Common Cause” have dropped the 1976 Prayer Book and have subscribed to the 1662 Prayer Book as representing their beliefs.

Bible
The readily available (and inexpensive) “King James Versions” is a good translation to begin with. It hasn’t been messed with by eager scholars, as have many other Bibles. The meanings of the original Evangelists has been preserved in the word order, and in the particular words. You will notice that the emphasis in the sentence - that is the phrase that is the most important to remember - is always at the end of the sentence. The AV translators were also careful not to destroy the sentence structure that contains clues to the underlying Aramaic language of the Apostles, and hence to the colloquial expressions. Many strange sentences (e.g. “camel through the eye of a needle”) were preserved for later Aramaic scholars to explain (it wasn’t camel - it was rope).

BibleChoices

Thu, 13 Dec 2007 11:46:30 -0500

A 20 minute presentation on the three streams of Bible translations: from Jerome (Vulgate) Lucian (KJV), compared with recent translations from the Vaticanus, and Sinaitcus MSS (NIV, REB, TEV, CEV, NRSV etc.).

History of the Bible

Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:51:25 -0500

Don’t expect to find a New Testament that really contains the actual words of God.
The Hebrew OT does contain the actual words of God,according to the rabbinical tradition. Since the 11th. cent. the Hebrew in the Torah has been copied exactly. It is still written by hand with a nonmetallic writing instrument, just as it has always been. Today a Torah scroll takes about a year to copy by hand, and costs about $60,000. Translated versions of the Hebrew Bible differ one from another depending on the authority. The Conservative Hebrew Bible has different English wording than the Orthodox, and the Liberal. The printed Hebrew remains identical.

There are in existence several hundred versions of the NT, and some 10,000 MSS of books of the NT. No two MSS use the exact same words in the same word order. Even our NT printed versions are different. In the King James alone there are a dozen printings each one with errors different from the other. There is one edition that left out the word “not” in the commandment and it states “thou shalt commit adultery”.
But these differences in the NT printings of the KJV pall into insignificance next to the changes introduced by the Revised Version, the RSV, the NIV and so on. In these NT there are thousands of differences in not only the words but in theology.
In addition to the printing errors, there are errors introduced through a misunderstanding of the underlying Aramaic, which was the language of the Apostles. Some Aramaic phrases could not be translated because the knowledge of Aramaic colloquialisms were lost.

God didn’t speak directly to His “listeners”, and the listeners only spoke Aramaic. No-one spoke English at that time. The English NT is a creation of the translators, who have compared perhaps hundreds of old Greek Bible MSS, and have translated the text into vernacular English. The same is true for Latin Bibles, and Syrian Bibles etc.

There is no such thing as an infallible Bible. When the Churchmen say the “Bible is infallible, or is inerrant” they mean that the original writings of Jesus apostles were inerrant, not the Bible you read. Unfortunately MSS that might have been written at the time of Jesus, have never been found.

The oldest “complete bible” so far discovered was written in Aramaic in the 4th. century. It is in the British Museum. Until recently no-one could read it because there was no dictionary (lexicon). So it was ignored by translators until a Lexicon was finally available in 1938.

Most of the modern Bibles printeed since 1860 are translated from a Greek codex discovered in the 19th. cent., and most of the modern Bibles are based on a translation of this Greek MSS made. In fact there were two Greek codices discovered about the same time. These two early Greek Codices (meaning put together in book form, not a scroll) from the fifth century are very different from one another. And they don’t contain the exact same books as in the King James Bible. Both use the Greek OT and include the Apocrypha. But when they were translated into English,most publishers chose not to print the Apocrypha.

When the translators used these Greek codices to make an English Bible they left out some of the books, and added in others to make their printed bible have the traditional 27 books of the NT.

The original MSS from which the King James Bible was translated, are not in existence. But during the early 20th. cent. many MSS scraps have been discovered that support the wording of some books in the King James NT. AS new MSS are found we continue to find support for the language of the King James Version.

About A.D. 310 Lucian, a Bishop in Antioch, collected what Gospel MSS were available, and wrote a master MSS which contained the best version of the Gospels as attested to by the Bishops of various towns. This MSS is lost, but there are thousands of copies of Lucian’s MSS, although with many corrections and additions, deletions and marginal notes. Yet it was possible for scholars to reconstruct the original MSS from these versions, and this has been preserved to this day in the King James Authorized versions of 1611 - 1792.

You can buy the 1611 version (many printers errors) but what is in the book stores today is the 1792 version, the final version approved by the English Parliament - not free of errors, but the had to stop as the new editions designed to correct the errors of the previous printing, only added different errors. There are some sad versions like the one that said “thou shalt commit adultery”. The Crown of England Copyright restriction prevents other publishers from making any modification to this edition, such as the addition of marginal notes, and chapter summaries (though the original 1611 version had these).

If a publisher wants to make changes, the resultant volume cannot be called the Holy Bible, King James Authorized version. In the US, local printers infringe on the copyright by publishing the KJV. Who knows what errors they have introduced?
In an effort to avoid infringing the Crown copyright, publishers commission their own translations so there are books like the New King James Bible which is based on none of the MSS used for the KJV, but it does read similarly, and it does have marginal notes, and it does apologize when its translator differs in opinion to the KJV translators.
Almost all the Bible versions that were based on the 5th. cent. Greek MSS are out of print, thank goodness. All except for the NIV which is the Bible of most Protestant groups. The translators disagreed with apostolic authority and no clergy were invited to be part of the translation. This Bible disagrees with Church theology ( I have written a monograph on the differences Contra NIV denials.pdf).

The Vatican Bibles for the Roman Catholics (the Vulgate in Latin, The Rheims-Duoay English version) are very similar in theology to that of the Anglican Church - almost interchangeable and the wording is very familiar to a reader of the KJV. Later translations made from the Greek MSS by US translators have not been approved by the Vatican (the NAB and RNAB, the RSV and NRSV are not approved by the Vatican) and suffer from some of the theological errors in Protestant Bibles.

The Syrian Bible which is in use by the Syrian Church of the East is an Aramaic translation from very old Greek MSS, much closer to the time of Jesus, and in fact is the oldest Bible MSS in existence. The English translation of this Aramaic Bible is very close in wording to the King James Bible. In fact on reading it, you will notice how much it sounds like the familiar KJV. In a few places the translation of an Aramaic expression is different, because when the KJV was written no-one could say what those Aramaic expressions actually meant, apart from the traditions of the RC Church.

The English soldiers discovered some Aramaic speaking villages during the War with the Turks (Lawrence of Arabia’s war). No -one knew what they were saying, so after the war two teams of scholars from Oxbridge were sent to teach them English. What an eye opener that was! By 1938 the first Aramaic/English Lexicon was produced and for the first time English readers could see that it was a “rope” through the eye of a needle - not a “camel”. And that “Tabitha” was not a name of a woman, but was the Aramaic word for “disciple”. And that Jesus didn’t say “why have you abandoned me”, but “for this I was born”.

For the Old Testament, most Bibles use an English translation of the Massoretic Hebrew Tanakh which is taken from 11th. c. Codices. But our Old Testament differs from the Hebrew Torah significantly - in the number and order of books, and in the text itself. What we term Old Testament is a Christianized version of the Hebrew Tanakh. In fact our Old Testament is missing the Hebrew Oral Torah which is considered by Jews to be scripture and just as important as the written Torah and is included in the Talmud. At the time our Bible was created, the Oral Torah had not been written. By the 3rd. cent. the Hebrew Bible was complete with both written and oral Torah, but too late to have it included in our Bible.

There is another “Old Testament” written about 300 B.C. and later used by the writers of the New Testament. This OT included the ancient Hebrew written Torah (actually in Aramaic) translated into Greek. Many Greek additions were made (the Apocrypha) , and the entire work was “published” as the Septuagint. It was in use by the Jews of Alexandria, and possibly Antioch, and many of its expressions found their way into the NT. You will sometimes find that a modern NT quotation about a place or event in the Old Testament, is missing from the Old Testament that is in that Bible, and yet can be found in the relevant passage of the Septuagint (which is now used only by the Greek Orthodox churches).

In the 4th. cent there was a war of words over the differences between the Greek OT, and the new “Hebrew” OT. The Greek said the Mary was “a Virgin”, the Hebrew that she was just a “Young woman”. So the Hebrew OT was “adjusted” in our Bible to say that Mary was a virgin.

Nonetheless the Greek OT was abandoned by the RC Church after St. Jerome translated the Hebrew into classical latin in the 5th. cent. He thought that the Greek was a bad translation, after he listened to the Hebrew scholars in Bethlehem, where he had moved to in order to do the translation. And that’s why we have an OT based on the Hebrew Torah, and not the Greek that the NT writers actually used.
The Eastern Catholic Churches continued to use the Greek OT.

If you care to look up some of the names in the NT that refer to OT locations, you sometimes cannot find them in our OT, because the NT writers were using the Greek names in the Septuagint. Check the Septuagint and there they are. Why not use the Greek Septuagint in its English translation?
Well, the Traditions of the Church use the language of the Hebrew OT when they are referring to prophesies etc. But the Psaltery from the Septuagint is still in use!

In every Bible, there is hidden the spiritual message from God to believers, which is discovered by study and thinking about God. Some Bibles make it easier to find the truth. Some Bibles support the Traditions of the Church and so lead to right action - good spiritual works.
But there are some bad Bibles that on the surface (in the text) can lead people to errors if they are using their head and not their heart. Just because the text is easier to read and the words more familiar, doesn’t mean that God’s meaning is clearer. In fact it is usually the case that the easier the text is to read, the less time you will spend trying to understand the text by the Holy Spirit.

History of the Bible 2

Mon, 10 Dec 2007 12:13:02 -0500

Where the Original MSS for the King James Version originated

About A.D. 310 Lucian, a Bishop in Antioch, collected what Gospel MSS were available, and wrote a master MSS which contained the best version of the Gospels as attested to by the Bishops of various towns. This MSS is lost, but there are thousands of copies of Lucian’s MSS, although with many corrections and additions, deletions and marginal notes. Yet it was possible for scholars to reconstruct the original MSS from these versions, and this has been preserved to this day in the King James Authorized printings of 1611 - 1769.

You can buy the 1611 printing from Henriksen Publishers or from Barnes and Noble (remember the 1611 version has many printers errors) but most KJV Bibles are copies of the 1769 printing, the final version approved by the English Parliament - not free of errors, but they had to stop somewhere. The Crown of England Copyright prevents other publishers from making any modification to this edition, such as the addition of marginal notes, and chapter summaries (though the original 1611 printing had these).

If a publisher wants to make changes, the resultant volume cannot be called the Holy Bible, King James Authorized version. In the US, local printers infringe on the copyright by publishing the KJV. Who knows what errors they have introduced?
In an effort to avoid infringing the Crown copyright, publishers commission their own translations of the Codices, so there are books like the New King James Version which is based on only some of the MSS used for the KJV, but it does read similarly, and it does have marginal notes, and it does apologize when its translator differs in opinion to the KJV translators..
Almost all the Bible versions that were based on the 5th. cent. Greek Codices are out of print, except for the NIV which is the Bible used by most evangelical Protestant groups. The translators comprised of academics who disagree with apostolic authority so no clergy were invited to be part of the translation. This Bible disagrees with Church theology ( I have written a monograph on the differences Contra NIV denials.pdf).

The Vatican Bibles for the Roman Catholics (the Vulgate in Latin, The Rheims-Duoay English version) are very similar in theology to that of the Anglican Church - almost interchangeable - and the wording is very familiar to a reader of the KJV. Later translations made from the Greek codex which were commissioned by the US Catholic Bishops has not been approved by the Vatican (the NAB and RNAB) Other publishers have produced “Catholic Versions” such as the RSV and NRSV but these have not been approved by the Vatican). They suffer from some of the same theological errors as Protestant Bibles.

The Syrian Bible which is in use by the Syrian Church of the East is an Aramaic translation from very old Greek MSS, much closer to the time of Jesus, and in fact is the oldest Bible MSS in existence. The English translation of this Aramaic Bible is very close in wording to the King James Bible. In fact on reading it, you will notice how much it sounds like the familiar KJV. In a few places the translation of an Aramaic expression is different, because when the KJV was written no-one could say what those Aramaic expressions actually meant, apart from the traditions of the RC Church.

The English soldiers discovered some Aramaic speaking villages during the War with the Turks (Lawrence of Arabia’s war). No -one knew what they were saying, so after the war two teams of scholars from Oxbridge were sent to teach them English. What an eye opener that was! By 1938 the first Aramaic/English Lexicon was produced and for the first time English readers could see that it was a “rope” through the eye of a needle - not a “camel”. And that “Tabitha” was not a name of a woman, but was the Aramaic word for “disciple”. And that Jesus didn’t say “why have you abandoned me”, but “for this I was born”.

For the Old Testament, most Bibles use an English translation of the Massoretic Hebrew Tanakh which is taken from 11th. c. Codices. But our Old Testament differs from the Hebrew Torah significantly - in the number and order of books, and in the text itself. What we term Old Testament is a Christianized version of the Hebrew Tanakh. In fact our Old Testament is missing the Hebrew Oral Torah which is considered by Jews to be scripture and just as important as the written Torah and is included in the Talmud. At the time our Bible was created, the Oral Torah had not been written. By the 3rd. cent. the Hebrew Bible was complete with both written and oral Torah, but too late to have it included in our Bible.

There is another “Old Testament” written about 300 B.C. and later used by the writers of the New Testament. This OT included the ancient Hebrew written Torah (actually in Aramaic) translated into Greek. Many Greek additions were made (the Apocrypha) , and the entire work was “published” as the Septuagint. It was in use by the Jews of Alexandria, and possibly Antioch, and many of its expressions found their way into the NT. You will sometimes find that a modern NT quotation about a place or event in the Old Testament, is missing from the Old Testament that is in that Bible, and yet can be found in the relevant passage of the Septuagint (which is now used only by the Greek Orthodox churches).

In the 4th. cent there was a war of words over the differences between the Greek OT, and the new “Hebrew” OT. The Greek said the Mary was “a Virgin”, the Hebrew that she was just a “Young woman”. So the Hebrew OT was “adjusted” in our Bible to say that Mary was a virgin.

Nonetheless the Greek OT was abandoned by the RC Church after St. Jerome translated the Hebrew into classical latin in the 5th. cent. He thought that the Greek was a bad translation, after he listened to the Hebrew scholars in Bethlehem, where he had moved to in order to do the translation. And that’s why we have an OT based on the Hebrew Torah, and not the Greek that the NT writers actually used.
The Eastern Catholic Churches continued to use the Greek OT.

If you care to look up some of the names in the NT that refer to OT locations, you sometimes cannot find them in our OT, because the NT writers were using the Greek names in the Septuagint. Check the Septuagint and there they are. Why not use the Greek Septuagint in its English translation?
Well, the Traditions of the Church use the language of the Hebrew OT when they are referring to prophesies etc. But the Psaltery from the Septuagint is still in use!

In every Bible, there is hidden the spiritual message from God to believers, which is discovered by study and thinking about God. Some Bibles make it easier to find the truth. Some Bibles support the Traditions of the Church and so lead to right action - good spiritual works.
But there are some bad Bibles that on the surface (in the text) can lead people to errors if they are using their head and not their heart. Just because the text is easier to read and the words more familiar, doesn’t mean that God’s meaning is clearer. In fact it is usually the case that the easier the text is to read, the less time you will spend trying to understand the text by the Holy Spirit.

History of the Bible 3

Sun, 9 Dec 2007 12:25:40 -0500

The Aramaic Bible

The Syrian Bible which is in use by the Syrian Church of the East is an Aramaic translation from very old Greek MSS, much closer to the time of Jesus, and in fact is the oldest Bible MSS in existence. The English translation of this Aramaic Bible is very close in wording to the King James Bible. In fact on reading it, you will notice how much it sounds like the familiar KJV. In a few places the translation of an Aramaic expression is different, because when the KJV was written no-one could say what those Aramaic expressions actually meant, apart from the traditions of the RC Church.

The English soldiers discovered some Aramaic speaking villages during the War with the Turks (Lawrence of Arabia’s war). No -one knew what they were saying, so after the war two teams of scholars from Oxbridge were sent to teach them English. What an eye opener that was! By 1938 the first Aramaic/English Lexicon was produced and for the first time English readers could see that it was a “rope” through the eye of a needle - not a “camel”. And that “Tabitha” was not a name of a woman, but was the Aramaic word for “disciple”. And that Jesus didn’t say “why have you abandoned me”, but “for this I was born”.

For the Old Testament, most Bibles use an English translation of the Massoretic Hebrew Tanakh which is taken from 11th. c. Codices. But our Old Testament differs from the Hebrew Torah significantly - in the number and order of books, and in the text itself. What we term Old Testament is a Christianized version of the Hebrew Tanakh. In fact our Old Testament is missing the Hebrew Oral Torah which is considered by Jews to be scripture and just as important as the written Torah and is included in the Talmud. At the time our Bible was created, the Oral Torah had not been written. By the 3rd. cent. the Hebrew Bible was complete with both written and oral Torah, but too late to have it included in our Bible.

There is another “Old Testament” written about 300 B.C. and later used by the writers of the New Testament. This OT included the ancient Hebrew written Torah (actually in Aramaic) translated into Greek. Many Greek additions were made (the Apocrypha) , and the entire work was “published” as the Septuagint. It was in use by the Jews of Alexandria, and possibly Antioch, and many of its expressions found their way into the NT. You will sometimes find that a modern NT quotation about a place or event in the Old Testament, is missing from the Old Testament that is in that Bible, and yet can be found in the relevant passage of the Septuagint (which is now used only by the Greek Orthodox churches).

In the 4th. cent there was a war of words over the differences between the Greek OT, and the new “Hebrew” OT. The Greek said the Mary was “a Virgin”, the Hebrew that she was just a “Young woman”. So the Hebrew OT was “adjusted” in our Bible to say that Mary was a virgin.

Nonetheless the Greek OT was abandoned by the RC Church after St. Jerome translated the Hebrew into classical latin in the 5th. cent. He thought that the Greek was a bad translation, after he listened to the Hebrew scholars in Bethlehem, where he had moved to in order to do the translation. And that’s why we have an OT based on the Hebrew Torah, and not the Greek that the NT writers actually used.
The Eastern Catholic Churches continued to use the Greek OT.

If you care to look up some of the names in the NT that refer to OT locations, you sometimes cannot find them in our OT, because the NT writers were using the Greek names in the Septuagint. Check the Septuagint and there they are. Why not use the Greek Septuagint in its English translation?
Well, the Traditions of the Church use the language of the Hebrew OT when they are referring to prophesies etc. But the Psaltery from the Septuagint is still in use!

In every Bible, there is hidden the spiritual message from God to believers, which is discovered by study and thinking about God. Some Bibles make it easier to find the truth. Some Bibles support the Traditions of the Church and so lead to right action - good spiritual works.
But there are some bad Bibles that on the surface (in the text) can lead people to errors if they are using their head and not their heart. Just because the text is easier to read and the words more familiar, doesn’t mean that God’s meaning is clearer. In fact it is usually the case that the easier the text is to read, the less time you will spend trying to understand the text by the Holy Spirit.

History of the Bible 4

Sat, 8 Dec 2007 12:27:13 -0500

The Hebrew Old Testament

For the Old Testament, most Bibles use an English translation of the Massoretic Hebrew Tanakh which is taken from 11th. c. Codices. But our Old Testament differs from the Hebrew Tanakh significantly - in the number and order of books, and in the text itself. What we term Old Testament is a Christianized version of the Hebrew Tanakh.

There is another “Old Testament” written about 300 B.C. and later used by the writers of the New Testament. This OT included the ancient Hebrew written Torah (actually in Aramaic) translated into Greek. Many Greek additions were made (the Apocrypha) , and the entire work was “published” as the Septuagint. It was in use by the Jews of Alexandria, and possibly Antioch, and many of its expressions found their way into the NT. You will sometimes find that a modern NT quotation about a place or event in the Old Testament, is missing from the Old Testament that is in that Bible, and yet can be found in the relevant passage of the Septuagint (which is now used only by the Greek Orthodox churches, and has been used as the OT in some modern translations of the Bible).

In the 4th. cent there was a war of words over the differences between the Greek OT, and the new “Hebrew” OT. The Greek said the Mary was “a Virgin”, the Hebrew that she was just a “Young woman”. So the Hebrew OT was “adjusted” in our Bible to say that Mary was a virgin.

Nonetheless the Greek OT was abandoned by the RC Church after St. Jerome translated the Hebrew into classical latin in the 5th. cent. He thought that the Greek was a bad translation, after he listened to the Hebrew scholars in Bethlehem, where he had moved to in order to do the translation. And that’s why we have an OT based on the Hebrew Torah, and not the Greek that the NT writers actually used.
The Eastern Catholic Churches continued to use the Greek OT.

If you care to look up some of the names in the NT that refer to OT locations, you sometimes cannot find them in our OT, because the NT writers were using the Greek names in the Septuagint. Check the Septuagint and there they are. Why not use the Greek Septuagint in its English translation?
Well, the Traditions of the Church use the language of the Hebrew OT when they are referring to prophesies etc. But the Psaltery from the Septuagint is still in use!

In every Bible, there is hidden the spiritual message from God to believers, which is discovered by study and thinking about God. Some Bibles make it easier to find the truth. Some Bibles support the Traditions of the Church and so lead to right action - good spiritual works.
But there are some bad Bibles that on the surface (in the text) can lead people to errors if they are using their head and not their heart. Just because the text is easier to read and the words more familiar, doesn’t mean that God’s meaning is clearer. In fact it is usually the case that the easier the text is to read, the less time you will spend trying to understand what it was that God really meant you to learn.

The_Kingdom

Sun, 5 Aug 2007 21:28:45 -0400

Jesus hoped that all his flock would be reunited with His Father. This was to be accomplished by shepherding them into the Kingdom of Heaven first, and then into the Kingdom of God. All His laws, commandments, and teaching were for that purpose.

The Kingdom of Heaven is a spiritual environment that Jesus founded, of which He is the chief corner stone. It is a way of life where you learn to do God’s Will, rather than your own. It is a “way” that creates peace for one’s spirit, and peace for other’s. It is a way that can breed a habit of charitable love for all people whose paths cross ours. It is a way that encourages study and meditation, and a burning desire to know about God. It is a way that creates a worry-free, care-less life style, where all problems are handed over to God.
The kingdom of Heaven is a metaphor for the Christian Way (the gospel of the Kingdom of Christ, or the preaching of Christ)

This is what the gospel according to Matthew says:
(Matthew 24:14) And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
(Mt 7:21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Here are some things that will make it hard to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Mt 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mt 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mt 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And this is what one of the Church Fathers thought.

“That person is already in the Kingdom of the heavens who lives according to the virtues. Accordingly, the saying repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand, refers to deeds and disposition - not to a certain time.” Origen c.245 quoted by
Eusebius.

The late Rev’d Dr. William Henry Ralston of St. John’s Church in Savannah wrote:
“ ... the Church has been tempted to measure her life on earth in terms of her service to the world and its needs. What happens then is an inversion of order of the two great commandments: thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself and in so doing thou shalt love the Lord thy God. The value of the Church comes to be measured by the value of her compassionate caring for human beings ...The commandment to love our neighbor becomes our point of reference. but this is not the way we are given it. Jesus said “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness.”
Jesus did not come in order to perform miracles, nor to heal, nor to do the immense good works He actually did, but in order to announce the Kingdom of God and to inaugurate it amongst us. The essential gospel is supernatural and other-worldly. Its compassion, its love, its ministries in the world depend for their good on a reality not of this world. We have Jesus’s own words for it. “My Kingdom is not of this world”; “my Kingdom is not from hence.”
Christianity therefore puts before us an absolute opposite of the ideal of the well-adjusted person. Christianity is a gospel of disaffection, dissociation, and dissatisfaction with Caesar (“the world”) and all his works. It is the gospel of restlessness and maladjustment in this world. It states that while we live here, even though our life here is not unimportant “our citizenship is in heaven.” We do not belong to this world. We pass through it. The world is important only because of its spiritual source, that other world. Heaven gives earth its true significance.
The end of the matter is this. If you begin with God, you will end with God. If you begin with the world and yourself in it, no matter how neighborly you feel, and no matter how acute your conscience is you will end in the world. Your fate will be “your stinking self”. but worse. You will never come to heaven: not because God is mean or unwilling to have you there, but very simply because you have not wanted to go. May God forbid.”
Rev’d Dr. William Henry Ralston

We have been given instructions (the original gospels), which we are to study, line by line, word by word. As Anglicans love to say “read, mark, learn and inwardly digest”. But many people are distracted from studying by the material lifestyle of the West, and there never seems to be sufficient time.

So, the instructions on how to enter the Kingdom of God can be learnt from teachers - God’s chosen servants - Priests, Bishop’s and educated laity, who have been instructed on the spiritual meaning of the text (we hope).

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus describes the desirability of the Kingdom of Heaven to his disciples. And He used stories that speak to the “heart” of man and not to his consciousness.
Okay: the “heart” is a spiritual word, and it doesn’t mean something physical - like a real heart. The “heart” I think is related to the spiritual soul of man and is the vehicle to communicate with the Holy Spirit. What a man believes in his “heart” God knows about.

The problem that we all have is putting thoughts into a form that the heart can use for communicating with the Holy Spirit/God.
Conversely, for the Holy Spirit to communicate a spiritual truth in a form that your brain can understand, it first must be translated by the “heart”.

So, when Jesus was talking to the apostles, he would create the conditions so that the apostles would open their hearts to him while they were using their conscious mind to follow his words. Only those people who were in the presence of the invisible God (often called “glory”in the text) would be affected by the hidden message of the story.

After the Day of Pentecost, the apostles received the Comforter, which was able to awaken the apostle to the spiritual meaning of Jesus’s teachings, in much the same way that Jesus had done for them. All those who receive the gift of the Holy Spirit from God, have the same opportunity to know the “mysteries” of Jesus’s teachings.

For us, in this modern world, it is not so easy to hear the Holy Spirit because of all the distractions.
The Church Fathers developed methods of meditation that gave them a chance to hear the Holy Spirit. They called those methods “stillness”. The 3rd cent. Fathers often lived in “caves”, far away from civilization. Some lived in something like a monastery with a few people who could do the chores while they meditated and wrote. In the middle ages and later, the monasteries were built to provide an environment where the monk could isolate himself from all earthly distractions. This made it possible to concentrate on God the Holy Spirit, which personage is responsible for manifesting Christ to the believer.
Some of the methods used by the Church Fathers to “purify our hearts and see God” can be used in our own life.

.

Meditation

Thu, 1 Feb 2007 22:40:49 -0500

This is how I meditate on the word.
I read the passages in the King James Version. Then I stare at the words for perhaps 20 minutes, reading and re-reading. I make a cup of hot tea, stare at the words some more and drift off to sleep in an armchair, thinking about the passage, especially the most difficult part. As I drift in to sleep I feel peace. Now there must be no distractions - no phone, no other people about (dogs are okay). I sleep for a couple of hours, and wake up usually groggy from the short sleep. Then I sit at the computer keyboard and start typing as ideas from the first verse start coming. Then new ideas appear as fast as I type. Then I check the ideas against Church Fathers’ commentaries, and against one or two Anglican divines (17th cent.) to see who else has thought the same thing. Once I find a confirmation, I check the idea against other biblical passages to see whether this new understanding helps me to unbutton other difficult passages. If it does, then I know that I am on the right track to understanding some spiritual mystery.

If I try to do this meditation as I go to sleep at night it doesn’t work, because by the time morning comes around the ideas have vanished. The meditation period has to be relatively short. I don’t know how many times I have gone to bed and just as I dozed off I had a really bright idea which I promised myself I would write out in the morning. well the ideas never survive the night’s sleep.
It’s better to read the KJV and not a Bible written in modern English. The KJV is a language which supports the discernment of spiritual ideas. The words are literal translations of the original languages, and the 16th. cent. language is different enough that it makes you concentrate on the text itself, whereas with a modern translation you can be mistakenly confident that you have grasped the real meaning of a sentence, and you move on before finding the truth.

So here is my recommendation after thousands of hours of meditation on the written word. For meditation read the 1769 KJV, the one that is widely available. It is endorsed by the primate of the Church of England and by the English Parliament, and nobody can mess with it. Download from the internet, a KJV dictionary which makes it easier to understand the quaint expressions. Once you understand what a word originally meant, learn how to use it in a sentence, don’t translate it into its modern equivalent. For example: “a prevents b” means “a goes in front of/ or before/ or ahead of b” learn this use of prevent.
For better understanding of the literal meaning of the text, there are several Bibles that are worth keeping handy. For the NT, J.B. Philips, an Anglican priest, NT in Modern English. For meditative study avoid: NIV, RSV,NRSV,CEV, NCV, and all their derivatives. Though they are easy to read, not every translator would be called “holy”, some admit to not even going to Church, and it is obvious from the text that many do not support the Traditions of the apostolic Church.
There is a new KJV Bible that is easier to read yet does not make any change to the words of the KJV apart from replacing archaic spellings. It is the Sword Bible - I like it so far.

A Different Christianity

Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:55:53 -0400

I had been searching for a book that would help me understand Augustine’s commentary on the Sermon on the Mount for an Adult Education Class I was doing on this subject. For a month I had been looking in all the bookstores in Charleston. I found nothing. Surprisingly little had been written on the Sermon on the Mount, and nothing about St. Augustine’s commentary. It was getting close to the beginning of the semester, and I was still struggling with the introduction material for the series of perhaps ten discussion periods. One morning I awoke and couldn’t hear in one ear. It wouldn’t improve no matter what I did, and finally my wife dragged me off to a GP to have it looked at. He fixed it for me in about 30 minutes and I walked out hearing better in both ears than I had for years. I decided I would celebrate by buying a theology book - so off I went to Books A Million while Elaine went of to work.
I stood in front of the theology section, scanning the books that I had seen dozens of times, not expecting to see anything new, when suddenly a man appeared very close by holding a piece of paper out to me. He looked a little strange, one side of his face was misshapen. I looked at the paper. It was a small folded paper about 3 inches square and contained sign language. On the front it read “I am deaf” and it asked for a small donation. I looked at him and tried to ask a question but he just pointed to the paper. I gave him a dollar and he went on his way. I thought how strange that within a few minutes of getting back my hearing, I should meet this deaf-mute. I turned back to the book shelves and there I spotted a new book with a purple cover, something I had not noticed before. The title “A Different Christianity, Early Christian Esotericism and Modern Thought” by Robin Amis. I was intrigued and scanned the first few pages and though it wasn’t what I was looking for it was certainly interesting. I decided this would be my reward for getting back my hearing, and trundled off to the checkout to find out if I could afford it. The clerk scanned the book and said “I can’t find the price, take it to the service desk.” The manager was at the serevice desk and she scanned the book. “It’s not in the system”, she said “It cost $25 originally by the coding on the back, but it is not supposed to be in my inventory at all, because BAM doesn’t carry this book. I don’t know how it got here.” She looked it up on the internet by searching “Bookfinders”. Oh, she said, I’ve found a copy but you won’t like the price, it’s $168 dollars! And this is for a damaged paperback version!”
And this was the record she found.
16 Alibris
[United States]
ISBN: 079142572X
State Univ of New York Pr PAPERBACK VG 079142572X
Cover and page corners creased/bent. Pen marks on title
$168.44

“I can’t charge you that”, she said. “It really isn’t supposed to be here anyway. How does $12 sound to you?”
I was very happy.
As soon as I got home I looked it up on the internet by it’s ISBN number. Well, I couldn’t find it anywhere in the whole world. No-one had it for sale. I was puzzled, until I realized that the paperback volume had a different number. So this one I could find, the listing above, and I found several others at prices as low as $58. But what I had was a hardcover 1995 first edition, apparently unread as there were no signs of the pages ever having been turned. It must be worth hundreds! Then I wondered about why the book was placed there for me to find. It was a nice book and a collectors piece but what had it to do with my quest?
I began reading and found it very very interesting. It was the experiences of a man who had spent many summers at a monastery in Greece and it gave an insiders view into the traditional (3rd c.) spiritual practices of the Monks, something never before documented. Then on page 13, I was dumbfounded for it said “This book is for people who want to become more Christian and to follow the teachings of the Lord as given on the Sermon on the Mount”.
So there it was, just what I needed for the Adult Education class beginning next week.
You figure it out!

A chair in the corner

Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:04:07 -0500

This is where I think God lead me - the bookshop at the Church of St. Luke and St. Paul, Charleston. While surveying the books, I was inspired to ask for someone to talk to. Within a few minutes, a tall grey haired clergyman appeared and invited me to sit down in the hall and talk. I talked for thirty minutes. I told him about finding books, and searching for a spiritual home, and who I had talked to and which Churches I had visited, and he listened and nodded, and smiled and suddenly I knew that this was the place I had travelled thousands of miles to find. He couldn’t have been more welcoming. He was a theologian, educated here and at Oxford, a “Dean” of this Church, whatever that meant, and he understood everything I said. He suggested that I come to a series of six “lenten talks” that the clergy were to present beginning that very week, and that if everything seemed right, I could be baptized at the Easter Vigil.
It was six o’clock that first Wednesday that we walked into the parish hall, and joined the small queue of people at the buffet table - soup and cheese and bread mostly - because it was Lent, whatever that meant. We sat at an empty table. The Dean gave thanks for the food. An older man sat at the table with us, and started to chat, and we found that we had a common interest in sailing. A couple joined him, and the man was also a sailor, so we talked about our three year sailing adventure that we had just completed. Then an English couple stopped by the table to chat, and they were from Yorkshire, which is the home of my Father’s family. So, we felt comfortable very quickly. Everyone was very kind to us, and we left feeling very positive about everything.
By the last talk of the series, we felt that we had become part of the family.

Do you remember your baptism? Well, I shall never forget mine. It was late on Saturday night, and the Cathedral was in darkness, except for the light on the front porch. The Dean and several others were standing at the entrance with some large candles, and we were standing there too, wondering what we had to do. Our group entered the nave with lighted candles, and stopped at each row to light the small candles of those worshipping, and we helped with the lighting. We stood in the front pew, our candles lighting our prayer books, my body in Charleston, my head in space and the choirmaster and his chorister singing to God. We prayed in the wavering candlelight. Then the house lights came on and I was baptized by the Dean, and confirmed by Bishop Salmon, and I was officially “in”. I was elated, and relieved, and stupidly happy. I would have said “yes” to anything my wife asked for. We floated to the parish hall for the traditional champagne celebration.
I wish I could do it all again.

1611 King James version

Mon, 2 Feb 2004 10:59:12 -0500

This was before I was baptized.
I met my wife’s Sunday school teacher of long ago, and we chatted about what it was that my wife had studied when she was living in Anderson. During the conversation I asked her
“when did the Baptists remove the Apocrypha from their printings of the AV?”, and
“why did they call their Bible the “King James version” when it so obviously was not?”
Well,I was quickly informed that the KJV never had the Apocrypha in it. “Well”, I said, “I will find a “real” KJV for you and show you.”

It was a Friday afternoon, after 5 P.M. I called the LifeWay Bookstore in Anderson - Lifeway is a Baptist owned bookstore - and discovered they were open until 9PM, so off I went. My wife stayed at home expecting her sister to visit at any moment - this was only three days after Elaine’s job with SourceOne had been “eliminated” and she was now unemployed.

I arrived at the bookstore on Main Street, and walked into the shop and headed for the Bibles. Every KJV Bible I looked at, although entitled “King James version” was without the Apocrypha, even the Cambridge printing. I thought I would have fun with the staff and quizzed them about the KJV asking what had the Baptists done with the Apocrypha, and where was the real AV. According to the store clerk - he was only a trainee, though he knew some Bible history - the Apocrypha was not a part of the KJV and had not been since the Geneva Bible in the 1500’s. He said that it was at the council of Trent that the Apocrypha became a part of the Catholic Bible. Some of the Early Church Fathers had not wanted the Apocrypha in the first place - he mentioned Jerome and Origen specifically.
We spoke for about ten minutes, arguing back and forth and another man nearby overheard our arguments. He was a swarthy looking man - from the Near East, I guessed. He wore a black coat and had dark black hair and a black beard - he could have been an Arab. You will see why I mention him, later. Anyway, the store clerk advised me to go to the Family Book Store on Main street towards Town, or to the Books a Million store in the opposite direction. I knew that BAM had Catholic books, so told him that I would be going there first and thanked him for the help. But instead of going to BAM, I turned right onto Main street and drove to the Family Book Store.

Five minutes later, I was headed for the Bibles which were on the rear wall of the book store - I could see the sign from where I entered - and one of the staff asked me what I was looking for. I hesitated in my tracks and turned around to meet the woman who had left the sales counter and was heading my way. I asked whether she might have a 1611 AV in the store. She said not - which is what I expected. She said she had worked in this store for seven years and had never seen a KJV older than 1800. But we walked over to the rear wall to look at what she did have. It was then that a strange thing happened. The same swarthy man that I had met in the Baptist bookstore was standing at the shelves and as we approached, he turned to me and handed me a brown book. He said “This is what you are looking for.” I looked down at the book. I saw the title “The Holy Bible” and underneath in large letters “1611 Edition”. The book was sealed in a plastic wrap. I handed it to the store clerk to open it for me. She looked at it. “I have never seen this before”, she said. I did the inventory last month, it must have just come in.”
The store clerk and I walked over to the checkout desk and she opened the sealed wrapping.
It was a facsimile printing of the original 1611 AV complete with the Apocrypha and all the translators’ notes. I could not believe my eyes. I sat down for five minutes and pored over the book. It was perfect. The printing was clear, and everything was as I had hoped. I looked around for the “saint” who had discovered the book to ask him how he found it, but he was gone.

Well what do you think? An accidental discovery - or was the book meant just for me? And who was that man?