tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post4965535650949598359..comments2024-03-03T21:51:46.662-05:00Comments on stylos: WM 247: Rejoinder to a "Toxic" Book ReviewJeffrey T. Riddlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-37696073585891154262022-08-17T08:30:29.506-04:002022-08-17T08:30:29.506-04:00For those who've been following the conversati...For those who've been following the conversation on book reviews, accuracy, and charity, here is my 2019 review from the BLQ of Mark Ward's Authorized: The Use & Misuse of the KJB:<br /><br />https://www.academia.edu/43034092/Book_Review_Mark_Ward_Authorized_The_Use_and_Misuse_of_the_King_James_Bible_in_Bible_League_Quarterly_No_479_October_December_2019_28_31Jeffrey T. Riddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-79983999060919968062022-08-17T08:29:12.412-04:002022-08-17T08:29:12.412-04:00RLV,
Yes, I really did not understand MW's st...RLV,<br /><br />Yes, I really did not understand MW's statement (“I see in this book an effort to marginalize some TR defenders who cannot speak with any of the intelligence and grace (most of) these authors used.”) either. Not sure what he meant. Far as I know this was not something Christian and I were trying to do with the book.<br /><br />JTR<br />Jeffrey T. Riddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-84701098626501407092022-08-17T08:27:12.054-04:002022-08-17T08:27:12.054-04:00CBF,
In answer to your question, I think if the t...CBF,<br /><br />In answer to your question, I think if the term is to have any meaning the "Only" in KJVO must mean such a person who holds this position believes that the KJV is the ONLY Bible that can be used, even by those who do not speak English. This would mean it was specially inspired.<br /><br />I think such a view would be heretical, since I hold to the view expressed in WCF/2LBCF 1:8 that the Bible was "immediately inspired" in the original Hebrew and Greek. Translations are accurate to the degree that they fittingly convey the originals.<br /><br />That said, as an English speaker I prefer the AV as the classic Protestant translation based on the traditional text.<br /><br />As I have pointed out, one of the problems with Mark Ward is that he has repeatedly conflated the Confessional Text position with KJVO. This is neither fair nor accurate.<br /><br />Even Ward himself has admitted that this conflation is incorrect. See his comment on this post: http://www.jeffriddle.net/2022/07/wm-243-responding-to-another-comment-by.html<br /><br />Hope this helps. I'd also love to hear Mark Ward provide his definition of KJVO.<br /><br />JTRJeffrey T. Riddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-74324083824807572372022-08-16T22:59:32.663-04:002022-08-16T22:59:32.663-04:00MW: “I see in this book an effort to marginalize s...MW: “I see in this book an effort to marginalize some TR defenders who cannot speak with any of the intelligence and grace (most of) these authors used.”<br /><br />Maybe it is just me, but I found this statement almost incomprehensible.<br /><br />MW: “But I cannot recommend this book, and I am dismayed that the tiny Confessional Bibliology movement has gathered enough strength to publish it. I pray that its days will be few.”<br /><br />I think about this in contrast to my own review of Mark's book Authorized. I gave it a "qualified" recommendation. Qualified in the sense that I did not agree with his premise but thought his book a well-written promotion and defense of his premise. A source of honest debate between believers, with which folks on either side should be familiar.<br /><br />Mark, now I am dismayed that a tiny unimportant preacher recommended Authorized, even in a qualified way, and now pray that its days will be few. If I'da thought, I woulda shook the dust off my feet after I read it. (Written with only part of my tongue-in-cheek.)R. L. Vaughnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10992710377193518029noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-13085548881308740602022-08-16T19:21:25.723-04:002022-08-16T19:21:25.723-04:00"Critics of the traditional text, in fact, of..."Critics of the traditional text, in fact, often confuse our position with “King James Version-Onlyism,” a position which is inconsistent with WCF and LBCF 1:8."<br /><br />How do you define KJV-Onlyism, and on what authority or grounds do you base your definition?C.B. Fallsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-42238952190571155542022-08-16T14:36:56.687-04:002022-08-16T14:36:56.687-04:001. I read every word of the book—every chapter, an...1. I read every word of the book—every chapter, and all front and back matter. I dedicated time to reading it quickly because I wanted to make sure to represent you accurately in lectures I was set to deliver mere days after the book's release.<br /><br />2. I love the King James Version and am not opposed to it.<br /><br />These are the only responses I will give. I am content to let fellow Christians read my review, read your book, and come to their own conclusions.<br /><br />https://byfaithweunderstand.com/2022/07/24/review-why-i-preach-from-the-received-text/Mark Wardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08398684168648924493noreply@blogger.com