Radio Streams
SA Radio
24/7 Radio Stream
VCY America
24/7 Radio Stream
282

My Favorite Things
Home
NewsroomALL
Events | Notices | Blogs
Newest Audio | Video | Clips
Broadcasters
Church Finder
Webcast LIVE NOW!
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Category
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Language
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -52 sec
Top Sermons
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Broadcaster Dashboard
Members Only

Breaking News All | United Prayer | SA Center | SA Newsroom
FRONT PAGE  |  9/25/2021
MONDAY, JAN 11, 2010  |  83 comments
When Was the Bible Really Written?
Contributor:


The University of Haifa

By decoding the inscription on a 3,000-year-old piece of pottery, an Israeli professor has concluded that parts of the bible were written hundreds of years earlier than suspected.

The pottery shard was discovered at excavations at Khirbet Qeiyafa near the Elah valley in Israel -- about 18 miles west of Jerusalem. Carbon-dating places it in the 10th century BC, making the shard about 1,000 years older than the Dead Sea scrolls.

Professor Gershon Galil of the University of Haifa deciphered the ancient writing, basing his interpretation on the use of verbs and content particular to the Hebrew language. It turned out to be "a social statement, relating to slaves, widows and orphans," Galil explained in a statement from the University.

The inscription is the earliest example of Hebrew writing found, which stands in opposition to the dating of the composition of the Bible in current research; prior ...


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
www.foxnews.com
COMMENTS  locked  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 83 user comment(s)
News ItemSystem Notice
SermonAudio.com
This forum thread has been closed by SermonAudio.
No further comments are permitted for this news item.

News Item1/23/10 4:41 PM
James King  Find all comments by James King
Jim Lincoln wrote:
No, JK, it is a moot question no matter what if a Bible isn't in contemporary English, throw it out for church use. The article at Canada says "NO!" to KJV only. Does an adequate job, to show how one should be using the NASB, NIV, or ESV. Even the NKJV or Amer. KJV would be preferable because they are in contemporary English.
It would appear that Mod. Alpha requires us to stop posting our discussion on this thread Jim. So we will!!

As to your point above If the KING JAMES VERSION was properly taught and used in the church then there would be no problem for anybody in its comprehension. The confusion which modern versions have brought to the church, have not served God anywhere near the excellence which the KJV has done for these four centuries, history proves that fact. ONE Bible would unite churches better! And praise God higher!
I sincerely hope you find the true Bible Jim, and with others ditch these badly translated modern versions, which emerge from bad Greek texts.

83

News Item1/23/10 3:22 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Moderator Alpha, I suppose it happens because some cult members supporting some translation because of extra-biblical ideas seem to flock around anything with the word "bible" in it. I was happy to comment on the article itself, and was pleased with the extra information Neil had brought.

No, JK, it is a moot question no matter what if a Bible isn't in contemporary English, throw it out for church use. The article at [URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm]]]Canada says "NO!" to KJV only[/URL]. Does an adequate job, to show how one should be using the [URL=http://www.lockman.org/nasb/nasbcmp.php]]]NASB[/URL], NIV, or ESV. Even the NKJV or Amer. KJV would be preferable because they are in contemporary English. For the a person just starting out who doesn't know all the errors in the AV, let alone can't stomach Elizabethan English something different than the AV should be used.

Anyway, I hope I have said my last on this topic for awhile and look at topics separate from talismans.

82

News Item1/22/10 4:24 PM
prince charles | anglesey wales  Find all comments by prince charles
Moderator Alpha wrote:
Gentlemen,
Must every news item with the word "bible" in it become a battle ground for the never ending version debate?
yes it seems !
81

News Item1/22/10 4:22 PM
Moderator Alpha  Protected NameFind all comments by Moderator Alpha
Gentlemen,

Must every news item with the word "bible" in it become a battle ground for the never ending version debate? There are several surveys specifically for this purpose so may we please keep these news items topical, civil and meaningful.

Thank you.

80

News Item1/22/10 3:13 PM
James King  Find all comments by James King
Jim Lincoln wrote:
JK, I use the spelling that Americans prefer just like it is of course anti-American to use the [A]nglican [V]ersion of the Bible.

The AV was written to have an attitude in supporting Anglicanism not Christianity

Oh come now Jim, surely you don't need to reach to the depths of deceit to support your nasbiness? You use "Anglican" because you wish to denigrate the Word of God in the KING JAMES VERSION, which has been used by the Holy Spirit for FOUR CENTURIES.

"King James and His Translators as Anglicans

Another foolish charge made by unlearned critics is, "Why be hard on Westcott and Hort? Were not they Anglicans like King James and his translators?" However, to compare the Anglican Church at the end of the sixteenth century with the Anglican Church at the end of the nine-teenth century is no equation. Though the Church of England in 1600 may have been unscriptural in its episcopal form of church polity, views on baptism, and an incipient lack of evangelistic fervor, it was solid on the fundamentals of the faith. Its ministers in that day were Bible be-lievers and preached the gospel."

[URL=http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/sorenson-ch10-3.html]]]Translators of the Word of God in 1611[/URL]

79

News Item1/22/10 2:56 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
JK, I use the spelling that Americans prefer just like it is of course anti-American to use the [A]nglican [V]ersion of the Bible. The article, [URL=http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1824]]]Part III: From the KJV to the RV (from Elegance to Accuracy)[/URL] has little to do with the [URL=http://www.lockman.org/nasb/nasbcmp.php]]]NASB[/URL] or even the following article, [URL=http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/kutilek_unlearned_men.htm]]]The Unlearned Men:---The True Genealogy and Genesis of King-James-Version-Onlyism[/URL].

The AV was written to have an attitude in supporting [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglicanism]]]Anglicanism[/URL] not Christianity, q.v., [URL=http://www.kjv-only.com/rick/bancroft.html]]]The Influence of An Anglican Archbishop on the KJV[/URL]. Baptists in particular should consider the AV antichristian. As far as the new versions go, [URL=http://www.kjvonly.org/other/riplinger_lockman_pr.htm]]]The Lockman Foundation Reply to the Gail Riplinger book, "New Age Bible Versions"[/URL]

The most important aspect of the AV it is in neither modern American or British English, it takes a dictionary to read it properly or at least, the Ryrie's KJV Study Bible, and that is hindering the Word of God to English Christian, and that is anti-Christian!

78

News Item1/21/10 3:26 PM
James King  Find all comments by James King
Jim Lincoln wrote:
just at least take a look at Comparing Bible Translations--Conclusions. It doesn't matter if the [A]nglican [V]ersion used formal equivalence, because they used formal equivalence on an inferior source, Textus Receptus.
Oh Jim!! We are really worried about your ability to discern the truth on this point. The Truth BTW is in the KING JAMES VERSION, and the TR.

You really need to read these facts Jim, - [URL=http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/freeman-doctrines1.html]]]Bible Doctrines Affected by Modern Versions.[/URL]

Don't let your nasbiness blind you Jim.

PS I notice you are still having trouble spelling "Authorised" Jim!! Is this a side effect from your plight???

"The battle for the Word of God is going on today as it always has. The work of the Evil One himself has ever been to cause men to doubt the Word Gen.3:1, to corrupt the Word 2Cor.2:17, and to misquote the Word Luke 4:10,11. There are many Modern Versions on the scene today all claiming to be more accurate or more readable renderings of the Word of God. Most of these versions follow the MINORITY Greek Text even though that text exhibits a corruption throughout. The King James Version was translated from the MAJORITY Greek Text which agrees....."

77

News Item1/21/10 3:03 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Ah, the shoe is on the other foot, JK! just at least take a look at [URL=http://web.archive.org/web/20071012194730/faith.propadeutic.com/conclusions.html]]]Comparing Bible Translations--Conclusions[/URL]. It doesn't matter if the [A]nglican [V]ersion used formal equivalence, because they used formal equivalence on an inferior source, ([URL=http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF]]]... Textus Receptus...[/URL])as can be seen in [URL=http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1824]]]Part III: From the KJV to the RV (from Elegance to Accuracy)[/URL].

Anyway, the folks in Canada ([URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm]]]Canada says "NO!" to KJV only[/URL]) did an excellent job of pointing out several reasons, "[URL=http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=665]]]Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today[/URL]."

76

News Item1/20/10 4:10 PM
James King  Find all comments by James King
Jim Lincoln wrote:
looked at a combined concordance for the AV and ASV, you'll see quite a bit of dynamic equivalence in the AV.

the NIV has no doubt more dynamic equivalence than the AV, but still overall it is much more accurate than the AV,

I think you are becoming desperate in your mission to justify the badly translated and interpreted modern versions Jim.

For you to say that the NIV has more Dynamic Equivalence - AND - that the NIV is more accurate in the same breath, only goes to illustrate how far you've moved from the truth Jim. Your nasbiness is becoming unhealthy and endemic.

"Examples of REALLY BAD TRANSLATIONS found in a single reading of the NIV.
Rom 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter?"

First of all, notice that the NIV ELIMINATES the term "flesh," which is one of the most important theological terms in the entire Bible. The "flesh theology" begins in Genesis 2-3, and continues throughout the Scriptures. It is extremely significant in the Pauline understanding, especially in the book of Romans. This is NOT "concept by concept" or "dynamic equivalence" - it is unwarranted reduction"
[URL=http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/bacon-niv1.html]]]NIV ERRORS[/URL]

75

News Item1/20/10 3:00 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
While it is said, James King, that the [A]nglican [V]ersion uses formal equivalence, [URL=http://web.archive.org/web/20071021065646/http://faith.propadeutic.com/questions.html]]]Comparing Bible Translations[/URL], when you looked at a combined concordance for the AV and ASV, you'll see quite a bit of dynamic equivalence in the AV. So, yes, the NIV has no doubt more dynamic equivalence than the AV, but still overall it is much more accurate than the AV, which the good folks in Canada have pointed out--[URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm]]]Canada says "NO!" to KJV only[/URL]

Tony, when are you going to leave the [URL=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult]]]cult[/URL] of [URL=http://www.raptureme.com/rr-kjvo.html]]]King James Onlyism[/URL]. I'm really beginning to wonder if you aren't a Catholic or Mormon?

Yes, the AV will be remembered just like Shakespeare, and no more read. This is the problem with Old Bible, even those superior to the AV, such as Darby or the ASV are not read.

74

News Item1/19/10 5:02 PM
Tony Lopez-Cisneros  Find all comments by Tony Lopez-Cisneros
Allan wrote:
Tony...Sorry.
"allan": Your Appaling Grammar And Punctuation Demonstate That You Don't Know Much About The English Language. I'll Not Even Try To Determine What You Believe About It Tho As I Can't Stand Read(ing) The Small And Poor Formatting That You Constantly Write. Slandering Other People, Like Myself, In Your Post Doesn't Raise Your Worth In My Mind At All Either.

You Are Indeed A VERY SORRY Soul !

But I Pray That Almighty GOD Have Mercy Upon Your LOST SOUL & Help You, You POOR SORRY LOST SOUL !

*Note: To Readers & Moderators Of This Sermonaudio Website:

I Am Only Doing As THE AUTHORIZED HOLY BIBLE SCRIPTURES COMMANDS Me To Do In Answering POOR SORRY & LOST SOUL "alan":

"ANSWER A FOOL ACCORDING TO HIS FOLLY, LEST HE BE WISE IN HIS OWN CONCEIT." PROVERB 26:5 !

*NOTE 2: IF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, THE OT PROPHETS & NT APOSTLES PREACHED LIKE "alan" WRITES; NO ONE WOULD BE SAVED !

James King: Brother, Don't Let The LIES, HERESIES & APOSTASIES OF "Jim Lincoln" & Co. Bother You.

In The Next 10, 20 Or 30 Years (If THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE Tarries); NOBODY WILL EVEN REMBEMBER OR KNOW WHO "Jim Lincoln" Or The NASB IS Or WAS;

*BUT THEY'LL DEFINITELY KNOW & REMEMBER WHAT THE KING JAMES BIBLE IS, WAS & FOREVER WILL BE !

73

News Item1/19/10 3:42 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
James King wrote:
Mike, which came first the chicken or the egg?
---
The chicken!
72

News Item1/19/10 3:21 PM
James King  Find all comments by James King
Mike wrote:
Nothing, since the decline in the church began before them. Thinkest thou liberalism began in the 20th century? Nay, Jim King.
Mike, which came first the chicken or the egg?

What is the reason behind producing modern versions?
Because the KJV is "diagnosed" by the people producing them to be inadequate to the task of serving the Holy Spirit and teaching "modern" Christians.

What was the reason for this reason?
Numerical Decline? No! It was doctrinal decline! - Not as a response to, but as a continuity to that very decline.

For example, we can tie that back to dear old Westcott and Hort. They demonstrated the decline in doctrine which leads to modern Liberalism. And there were many other heretics which lead to the "modern" versions and the "modern" churches. Both are part and partial of the same errors we observe in the doctrinal vacuity in many churches.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
you use the NIV to pick out the errors in the AV which are many!
No comparison Jim!!!
The NIV and its Dynamic Equivalence makes for a sad attempt by man to write the bible. Man as per usual failed miserably!

And note well Jim the anglican clowns of the 1880's W & H contributed to the NIV - AND YOUR nasbiness!

71

News Item1/19/10 3:09 PM
princecharles | anglesey uk  Contact via emailFind all comments by princecharles
Jim Lincoln wrote:
Ah, for the others such as princecharles you have it wrong, you use the NIV to pick out the errors in the AV which are many!
slight misunderstanding possibly jim ?
i was using the KJ as my standard to see error in the NIV not the other way round maybe i misunderstood your post
70

News Item1/19/10 2:47 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
John UK, your a prophet, albeit, a false one saying that the Catholic translation of the Scripture is the best and always well be! [URL=http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF]]]Erasmus and the Textus Receptus by William W. Combs[/URL]. As has been pointed out before, the [A]nglican [V]ersion is a mediocre translation, q.v., [URL=http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1824]]]Part III: From the KJV to the RV (from Elegance to Accuracy)[/URL].

Ah, for the others such as princecharles you have it wrong, you use the NIV to pick out the errors in the AV which are many! [URL=http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1999/Combs.pdf]]]Errors in the King James Version?[/URL]. All Bible versions could find places where they could be translated better, especially the AV. I would suggest you read, [URL=http://web.archive.org/web/20071021065646/http://faith.propadeutic.com/questions.html]]]Comparing Bible Translations[/URL].

Oh, and again look over the Canadian site, [URL=http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm]]]Canada says "NO!" to KJV only[/URL].

69

News Item1/19/10 7:15 AM
John UK | Wales  Contact via emailFind all comments by John UK
Mike wrote:
Genesis 22:2
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. (KJV)

Then God said, "Take your son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." (NIV)

I was just looking these verses up on StudyLight to compare, and an offer came up on the page of a free copy of Richard Wurmbrand's book "Tortured for Christ" for everyone living on the US. This is a great offer if genuine and, having read the book myself three times, I would recommend it for one simple reason: it shows just how possible it is to be fiercely persecuted (and I mean FIERCELY) and yet be filled with love and concern for the persecutors.

[URL=http://www.studylight.org/desk/?l=en&query=gen+22%3A2§ion=0&translation=nas&oq=&sr=1]]]TRY HERE[/URL]

68

News Item1/19/10 3:54 AM
princecharles | anglesey uk  Contact via emailFind all comments by princecharles
Hi Mike, yes see what i mean ? I expect there are lots more if you looked.

How do you take the ecclesiastes passage ? I understand the world to mean that God has caused these men to be preoccupied with the world so that they cannot discern the things of God

The 'world' seems to go better with the passage, but you think that it should read eternity instead ? why is that ? this has troubled me before but i dont have an answer except that I trust the KJ

67

News Item1/18/10 7:38 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
princecharles wrote:
Ive found a few serious erors in the NIV ...i always take my AV to church but church uses NIV so i can see the errors (lies?) for instance in the KJ abraham is told to prepare isaac for a scarifice but in the NIV he is told to kill him, an infidel i spoke to picked up on this choosing the NIV account to criticise God so I was able to set him straight and explain how God was dealing with abraham at the time and how it cast light on abrahams charactar and God, its ruined with the NIV
also in ecclesistes the NIV says God has put eternity in mens heart but in the KJ it says the world - bit of a difference isnt there ! the NIV clashes with the sense of the passage
---
Genesis 22:2
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. (KJV)

Then God said, "Take your son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." (NIV)

Re: Ecclesiastes 3:11: World here does mean eternity. "World" could be misread as the earth. KJV could cause confusion here.

66

News Item1/18/10 5:47 PM
princecharles | anglesey uk  Contact via emailFind all comments by princecharles
Ive found a few serious erors in the NIV and i wasnt even looking for them and im no theologian either, i always take my AV to church but church uses NIV so i can see the errors (lies?) for instance in the KJ abraham is told to prepare isaac for a scarifice but in the NIV he is told to kill him, an infidel i spoke to picked up on this choosing the NIV account to criticise God so I was able to set him straight and explain how God was dealing with abraham at the time and how it cast light on abrahams charactar and God, its ruined with the NIV

also in ecclesistes the NIV says God has put eternity in mens heart but in the KJ it says the world - bit of a difference isnt there ! the NIV clashes with the sense of the passage

The NIV in my view is one of satans masterpieces and it grieves my heart that my church uses it and so many others to. It was translated by a comitee of lesbians and perverts (apparently)

i didnt get these things from research they are just things i noticed from more or less casual observation of my own.

Those responsible are going to pay a heavy price for messing with Gods word in my view

But nothing stops God from calling the elect and even the example i give the wrong translation was still used to provide an opening to talk about the Gospel

65

News Item1/18/10 4:20 PM
Mike | N ew York  Find all comments by Mike
James King wrote:
---
A myriad of versions are available today - But the church is in DECLINE!!! What does this say about modern versions in use today???
---
Nothing, since the decline in the church began before them. Thinkest thou liberalism began in the 20th century? Nay, Jim King.
64
There are a total of 83 user comments displayedSubscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 3 4 5 | last





Tech Talk Zoom // Episode 06

Dr. James M. Phillips
True Christianity & Power

Philippians From Greek 2021
Discover The Word With Dr...
Video!Play! | MP4

Dr. James M. Phillips
#17 Christian Meditation

Philippians From Greek 2021
Discover The Word With Dr...
Video!Play! | MP4

Grant Van Leuven
Live Life One Day at a Time

Puritan Reformed Presby Church
Sunday - AM
Play! | MP3

Dr. Fred DeRuvo
Prayer - Why Bother?

Study-Grow-Know Ministries
Podcast
Play! | MP3

Sponsor:
Best Free Puritan & Reformed Resources

Click Title Above! Mass­ive Treas­ure Trove: Free Pur­itan & Ref­ormed Res­ources Onl­ine!
https://www.puritandownload..

Sponsor: Leading a Post-COVID Church
https://churchanswers.com/l..

SPONSOR | 7,600+

SPONSOR




SA UPDATES NEWSLETTER Sign up for a weekly dose of personal thoughts along with interesting content updates. Sign Up
FOLLOW US


Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal

MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
ChurchOne App
Watch
Android
ChurchOne App
Fire Tablet
Wear
Chromecast TV
Apple TV
Android TV
ROKU TV
Amazon Fire TV
Amazon Echo
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
TECH TALKS

NEWS
Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe
Staff Picks | RSS
SA Newsroom
SERVICES
Dashboard | Info
Cross Publish
Audio | Video | Stats
Sermon Player | Video
Church Finder | Info
Mobile & Apps
Webcast | Multicast
Solo Sites
Internationalization
Podcasting New!
Listen Line New!
Events | Notices
Transcription
Billboards | Biz Cards
Favorites | QR Codes
Online Donations
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Embed Codes
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword | BLB
JSON API

BATCH
Upload via RSS
Upload via FTP
Upload via Dropbox

SUPPORT
Advertising | Local Ads
Support Us
Stories
ABOUT US
The largest and most trusted library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide.

Our Services | Articles of Faith
Broadcast With Us
Earn SA COINS!
Privacy Policy

TECH TALK
Tech Talk Zoom // Episode 06
Copyright © 2021 SermonAudio.