new book on Bible translation issue

[Logos1560]

Part of the Table of Contents of a new 658 page hardcover book entitled King James Onlyism: a New Sect by Dr. James D. Price (executive editor of NKJV's O. T.) that is now available follows:
[I have not read it yet since I just received a copy of it today]

INTRODUCTION: The King James Only Doctrine Is a New Idea

Original Languages Were Authoritative for Baptists
Original Languages Were Authoritative for Presbyterians
Original Languages Were Authoritative for Lutherans
Original Languages Were Authoritative for the Evangelical Free Church of America
Original Languages Were Authoritative for Interdenominational Churches
Original Languages Were Authoritative for Historical Leaders
Fundamentalism Is Divided over the King James Only Issue
This Book Discusses the Problems of the King James Only View

1. Early English Versions Were Incomplete until Wycliffe
Translating Is an Ancient Tradition
Bible Translations before Wycliffe Were Incomplete
Wycliffe Translated the First Complete Bible
Wycliffe’s Bible Was Opposed

2. Tyndale Was the First to Translate from Hebrew and Greek
Tyndale’s First New Testament Was in 1526
Tyndale Translated the Pentateuch in 1530
Tyndale Revised the New Testament in 1535
Tyndale Was Martyred in 1536
Tyndale Translation Exhibited Literary Excellence

3. Tyndale’s Translation Was Revised Seven Times
Coverdale Revised Tyndale’s Bible
Matthew’s Bible Was a Revision of Tyndale and Coverdale
The Great Bible Was a Revision of Matthew’s
Sample of the Great Bible
The Geneva Bible Was a Revision of Tyndale
The Bishop’s Bible Was a Revision of the Great Bible
The Rheims-Douay Bible Was Translated from Latin

4. The King James Version Was a Revision
Fifty-Four Translators Participated
The Qualifications of the Translators
The Theology of the Translators
The Character of the Translators
The Translators Had Fifteen Instructions
The Translation Was Carefully Edited
The Translation Exhibits Literary Excellence
The First Printing Was in 1611

5. The King James Version Was Revised Several Times
The KJV Was Revised at Cambridge in 1629
The KJV Was Revised at Cambridge in 1638
The KJV Was Unsuccessfully Revised in 1653
The KJV Was Revised at Cambridge in 1762
The KJV Was Revised at Oxford in 1769
Nearly 24,000Changes Were Made

6. Current Editions of the King James Version Differ
Known Discrepancies Exist
Misprints Exist
Other Inadvertent Oversights Exist
Many Archaic and Obsolete Words Remain
Current Editions Differ
Current Differences Are Recorded

7. The Biblical Text Was Preserved through Ancient Bibles
The Texts May Have Been Preserved by Various Means
The Hebrew Text Was Preserved in Ancient Hebrew Bibles
The Greek Text Was Preserved in Ancient Greek Bibles
Various Types of Manuscripts Exist
The Manuscripts Are Variously Distributed
Conclusion: Many Witnesses Exist for the Hebrew and Greek Texts

8. The Biblical Text Was Preserved in Ancient Translations
The Greek Versions Preserved the Text
Aramaic Versions Preserved the Text
The Syriac Versions Preserved the Text
Latin Versions Preserved the Text
The Coptic Versions Preserved the Text
Ethiopic Version Preserved the Text
The Armenian Version Preserved the Text
The Georgian Version Preserved the Text
The Waldensian Version Is Wrongly Represented
Conclusion: The Witness of the Versions Is Secondary

9. The Biblical Text Was Preserved in Patristic Quotations
Quotations of the Old Testament Preserved the Text
Quotations of the New Testament Preserved the Text
Conclusion: The Witness of the Quotations Is Incomplete and Secondary

[An attempt is being made to made it available at amazon.com]
Otherwise, order information can be obtained from:

James D. Price
2102 Colonial Pkwy Dr
Chattanooga, TN 37421-3309

 

[Ed Edwards]

Checking this out I found a real cool web page:

http://www.nmsr.org/neg-code.htm#rebut3

Negative Bible Codes

This shows that there are thousands of Bible Code matches
that say 'noun' & not 'noun'. This proves that Bible Codes
are bunk. IMHO Bible Codes are part of the end of times
apostasy.

 

[Keith M]

Apparently James D. Price has a pretty good handle on things - much better than Gipp, Ripplinger & Ruckman!

 

[franklinmonroe]

Apparently James D. Price has a pretty good handle on things - much better than Gipp, Ripplinger & Ruckman!

I sat under Dr. Price's teaching at Tennessee Temple University in the early '80s. He's a good man and has brilliant mind.

 

[Logos1560]

Dr. Price wrote that Edward "Hills presumed that God guided Erasmus, and the editors and the printers, to correct the errors in the Greek Traditional Text by means of the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. This kind of providential guidance is essentially no different than the divine inspiration given to the prophets and apostles when they wrote the original autographs of Scriptures. This kind of divine guidance is nothing less than a form of double inspiration--a doctrine taught nowhere in the Bible. Hills did not express his conclusion in these terms; in fact, he denied that the process involved inspiration" (p. 269).

Price added: "But double inspiration is the logical consequence of his presumed form of providential preservation--there is no essential difference" (p. 270).