From: george murphy (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Sep 13 2002 - 15:30:30 EDT
I have great respect for the KJV but consider the "KJV only" view,
especially in the extreme form you sketch below, completely loony. But the
point that I made in my earlier post was that a number of the
the gospels that inerrantists think require "harmonizing" are found in all
competent translations. To take the one I mentioned, & quoting from KJV:
Mt.20:29-30: And as they departed from Jericho, a great multitude
followed him. And behold two blind men, sitting by the way side ...
Mk.10:46: And they came to Jericho: and as he went out of
his disciples and a great number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of
Timaeus, say by the highway side begging."
Lk.18:35: And it came to pass that as he came nigh unto Jericho, a
certain blind man sat by the way side begging:
Historical "harmonization" is child's play: Jesus restored
the sight of
one blind man as he entered Jericho and two as he left, only one of whom is
mentioned by Mark. How plausible - or necessary - such a device is can be
debated, but the problem has nothing to do with the distinctive qualities of
George L. Murphy
"The Science-Theology Interface"
John Burgeson wrote:
> On Jul 29 you commented:
> >>& you can also argue that there were originally two blind men
> >instead of one in Mk.10:46-52 so that it agrees with Mt.20:29-34. Anything
> >can be harmonized with anything in this way, at the cost of rewriting the
> >Bible. ...[I] don't see how one can do this from a "KJV only" stance since
> >the problems are there in the KJV text.>>
> George -- sorry -- this one got "lost" for awhile.
> I finally was able to get a copy of Peter Ruckman's book THE "ERRORS" IN THE
> KING JAMES BIBLE. In this book Peter claims to have solved every one of
> these problems, showing that the 1611 text passes the test of complete
> inerrancy and hence is divinely inspired. Inspired even over the very greek
> texts from which it was translated.
> I have a very good friend of 40+ years, one who came to Christ partially, at
> least, through my testimonies to him when he was director of the University
> of Akron's Data Processing Center and I was his IBM technical rep. Bob (who
> lives near you in Cuyahoga Falls) embraced a very fundamentalist position,
> and he and I have carried on a mail correspondence for years on biblical
> inerrancy. He subscribes to Ruckman's position(s) pretty much down the line.
> I have been dipping into Ruckman's book from time to time -- I THINK I can
> find in it an answer to almost any KJV problem anyone can come up with. So
> if you or anyone else is interested, toss me (on the ASA list) a purported
> KJV problem and I'll see how Ruckman answers it. For this purpose, I'll
> assume the role of an academic, defending the KJV inerrancy to the best of
> my ability. I do not, of course, hold that position myself.
> Note that this exercise is confined to the KJV. Problems in other
> translations can always be "solved" by appealing to the original
> manuscripts. Since those are not available, such a solution seems to me to
> be without any usefulness.
> Persons on this list (I think there are two) who subscribe to Ruckman's
> approach can monitor me for fairness and correct me as appropriate.
> BTW, a Google search on "Peter Ruckman" turns up some fascinating sites. He
> is not quite a "David Koresh" or "Jim Jones" but he does have some of the
> same apparent personality characteristics. For sure, he is not shy at
> expressing his positions.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 14 2002 - 08:57:50 EDT