The NIV Is In Good Company

[TCassidy]

Why don't you read some of the letters King James wrote to his male friends and tell me how they could possibly be platonic?

I have read them. Understood in the cultural context of the late 16th early 17th century they are quite common, using the language of the British Court.

Perhaps if you would study a little more history, and read some of the writings from that day, you would be able to understand.

Are you one of those people who think David and Jonathan were gay lovers?

1 Samuel 16:21 And David came to Saul, and stood before him: and he loved him greatly; and he became his armour bearer.

1 Samuel 18:1 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.

1 Samuel 18:3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.

Context, context, context.

But, of course, it is impossible to read what I posted in context simply because you refuse to read it. Read James' book Basilicon Doron. It will open your eyes (if you lay aside your preconceived notions and let it).

 

[Yeshua1]

I have read them. Understood in the cultural context of the late 16th early 17th century they are quite common, using the language of the British Court.

Perhaps if you would study a little more history, and read some of the writings from that day, you would be able to understand.

Are you one of those people who think David and Jonathan were gay lovers?

1 Samuel 16:21 And David came to Saul, and stood before him: and he loved him greatly; and he became his armour bearer.

1 Samuel 18:1 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul.

1 Samuel 18:3 Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul.

Context, context, context.

But, of course, it is impossible to read what I posted in context simply because you refuse to read it. Read James' book Basilicon Doron. It will open your eyes (if you lay aside your preconceived notions and let it).

Even of the King was Gay, would that in any way affect the translation of the KJV? Think not, as don't think he was on the translation team, was he?

 

[HankD]

Agape love exceeds all love.

HankD

 

[TCassidy]

Even of the King was Gay, would that in any way affect the translation of the KJV? Think not, as don't think he was on the translation team, was he?

Yes, such a baseless accusation is usually a diversion from the actual topic at hand by those less than able to offer factual discussion.

 

[Rippon]

It is beyond dispute that KJ was not heterosexual.

"Further concerns were expressed over the king's increasingly obvious homosexual tendencies, which led to certain royal favorites being granted favors that were the subject of much comment and envy...although James fondled and kissed his favorites in what was widely regarded as a lecherous manner in public, the court was prepared to believe that his private behavior was somewhat more restrained." (pages 10-171 of Alister McGrath's In The Beginning: The Story Of The King James Bible And How It Changed A Nation, A Language, And A Culture)

 

[HankD]

Well the worst that we can say is that he was probably bisexual unless the 9 children were the product of parthenogenesis.

Hey, give him a break - 9 kids?

HankD

 

[Squire Robertsson]

And as it has been noted above, James I & IV didn't sit on any of the translation committees.

Well the worst that we can say is that he was probably bisexual unless the 9 children were the product of parthenogenesis.

Hey, give him a break - 9 kids?

HankD

 

[HankD]

Yes, one other thing - no book on earth has had the blessing of God like the King James Bible, the bible of the Great Awakening.

The Great Awakening swept through England and its colonies on the Atlantic seaboard from the 1720s through the 1770s. Millions of people professed faith in Christ. Church attendance in evangelical churches became common; a daily Bible reading became normal. Literacy rates dramatically rose as people longed to read the Bible.
One common denominator in the Great Awakening was that everyone in the English-evangelical world was using the same Bible—the King James Bible.

And the Modern Missionary Movement

The King James Bible was clearly the Bible of the Great Awakenings. Since a multitude of English Bibles have become common in the English speaking world, nothing similar to the Great Awakenings has taken place.

The aftermath of the first Great Awakening was the modern missions movement. In the late eighteenth century, pioneers like William Carey and Adoniram Judson called the attention of the English speaking world to the cause of missions. Missionaries would circle the globe preaching the Gospel, translating the Bible and planting churches.

These missionaries were quick to promote the need for vernacular Bible translations. Because of this, some have balked at suggesting that the King James Bible was the Bible of the modern missions movement. However, the early leaders of this movement were men saved under the preaching of the King James Bible. They were trained under the teaching of the King James Bible. They were called to the mission field under the preaching of the King James Bible. Often, they translated the King James Bible into vernacular languages.

http://www.preservedwords.com/legacy.htm

A long read but worth the time.

No, I am not KJVO (anymore) but we need to realize and give credit where credit is due for this extraordinary book used mightily of God.

It is not the human instruments but God Himself to whom we give the glory for this remarkable Bible.

HankD

 

[TCassidy]

It is beyond dispute that KJ was not heterosexual.

Yes, of course. A man writing in the 21st century is privy to secrets nobody in the 16th or 17th century were privy to. And using such devastating words as "widely regarded" and "prepared to believe." And who was it at court who had an ax to grind against King James? Oh yes! Anthony Weldon. You remember old Anthony, right? Dismissed from the court for his pathological xenophobia as evidenced in his book "A Description of Scotland?" You remember, the same guy who supported Parliament during the English Civil War and approved of the Regicide of Charles I, but did not live to see it. A man described as "kind to his friends but a bitter enemy to those who crossed him." Like James I and his son Charles I.

 

[Rippon]

In 1617 John Oglander (1585-1655) said that James "never yet saw any fond husband make so much or so great dalliance over his beautiful spouse as I have seen king James over his favourites, especially the Duke of Buckingham."

Who was this Duke of Buckingham? It was George Villiers (1592-1628).

King James wrote to this first Duke of Buckingham :
"I desire only to live in the world for your sake, and I had rather live banished in any part of the world with you, than live a sorrowful widow-life without you. And so bless you, my sweet child and wife, and grant that ye may ever be a comfort to your dear dad and husband."

Francis Osborne (1593-1659)
: "In wanton looks and wanton gestures the [James and George] exceeded
any part of womankind.
"The kissing them so lascivious a mode in public and upon the theatre, as it were, of the world."

Sir Edward Peyton (died in 1657):
"The king sold his affections to Sir George Villiers, whom he would tumble and kiss as a mistress."

 

[HankD]

TMI.

Ya, I know, I was also accused of TMI in another thread.

HankD

 

[Rippon]

TMI.

Ya, I know, I was also accused of TMI in another thread.

HankD

I had to look that up. I knew it couldn't have been referring to Three Mile Island! LOL

 

[Yeshua1]

In 1617 John Oglander (1585-1655) said that James "never yet saw any fond husband make so much or so great dalliance over his beautiful spouse as I have seen king James over his favourites, especially the Duke of Buckingham."

Who was this Duke of Buckingham? It was George Villiers (1592-1628).

King James wrote to this first Duke of Buckingham :
"I desire only to live in the world for your sake, and I had rather live banished in any part of the world with you, than live a sorrowful widow-life without you. And so bless you, my sweet child and wife, and grant that ye may ever be a comfort to your dear dad and husband."

Francis Osborne (1593-1659)
: "In wanton looks and wanton gestures the [James and George] exceeded
any part of womankind.
"The kissing them so lascivious a mode in public and upon the theatre, as it were, of the world."

Sir Edward Peyton (died in 1657):
"The king sold his affections to Sir George Villiers, whom he would tumble and kiss as a mistress."

Even if he was all of those things, did he translate any portion of the KJV to the church though?

 

[InTheLight]

Even if he was all of those things, did he translate any portion of the KJV to the church though?

No. And if there was a gay person on an NIV committee, she wasn't a translator either.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Yeshua1]

No. And if there was a gay person on an NIV committee, she wasn't a translator either.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

ironic that the same stuff Rippon wants to blastt KJV with, is same as some blasted his version with also!

 

[InTheLight]

ironic that the same stuff Rippon wants to blastt KJV with, is same as some blasted his version with also!

Someone alleged the NIV had a lesbian on the translation team. That was untrue. So I pointed out that King James himself was gay. This is true. And here you are, late to the thread.

 

[HankD]

I had to look that up. I knew it couldn't have been referring to Three Mile Island! LOL

Don't ask, I won't tell.

HankD

 

[TCassidy]

More nonsense. Failing to understand the flowery court language common in England over 400 years ago, taking it completely out of context and ascribing to it that which is only in the hearts of those who have fallen for the "gay agenda:" To claim most people of history to have been sodomites so they can point out how great and wonderful such sin is.

Virginia Mollenkott is a red herring being used by ignorant haters of the NIV to avoid discussing the actual merits of the NIV, just as the false charges against James I are used by ignorant haters of the KJV to avoid discussing the actual merits of the KJV.

 

[InTheLight]

More nonsense. Failing to understand the flowery court language common in England over 400 years ago, taking it completely out of context and ascribing to it that which is only in the hearts of those who have fallen for the "gay agenda:" To claim most people of history to have been sodomites so they can point out how great and wonderful such sin is.

Virginia Mollenkott is a red herring being used by ignorant haters of the NIV to avoid discussing the actual merits of the NIV, just as the false charges against James I are used by ignorant haters of the KJV to avoid discussing the actual merits of the KJV.

To borrow a technique that you use--"Where did I point out that sodomy was great and wonderful?" "Where did I say I hated the KJV?"

And, claiming that King James used flowery court language is used to disguise and cover up his homosexuality. Turnabout is fair play, huh?

The "flowery court language" you speak of can be read and understood for what it is. What heterosexual male would describe a male friend as a "wife"?

 

[InTheLight]

I grew up with the KJV. Most of my memorization verses are in the KJV. I still read the KJV. I like the KJV. Doesn't have anything to do with the fact that King James liked men.