Werewolves Are Real!

Recent Story, Werewolf sighting

Modern Transformation Case

Notes on Baelish231
An archaic form of Chivian, Baelish is written much as English was written a thousand years ago. The alphabet contains twenty-four letters. Every letter is pronounced, even when this seems impossible, as in cniht and hlytm.
...
Many Old English words have gone out of use: wer meaning "man" survives only in "werewolf." Others have survived unchanged--a hwæl is still a "whale." Cniht, which originally meant "boy," (cnihtcild was a "boy child") was transformed into "knight," and the k was still being pronounced when English spelling was standardized a couple of hundred years ago.
    She carried the scroll to the long table at which Duraid, her husband, was already at work. He looked up as she laid it on the tabletop before him, and for a moment she saw the same mystical mood in his eyes that had affected her. He always wanted the scroll there on the table, even when there was no real call for it. He had the photographs and the microfilm to work with. It was as though he needed the unseen presence of the author close to him as he studied the texts.
    Then he threw off the mood and was the dispassionate scientist once more. `Your eyes are better than mine, my flower,' he said. `What do you make of this character?'
    She leaned over his shoulder and studied the hieroglyph on the photograph of the scroll that he pointed out to her. She puzzled over the character for a moment before she took the magnifying glass from Duraid's hand and peered through it again.
    `It looks as though Taita has thrown in another cryptogram of his own creation just to bedevil us.' She spoke of the ancient author as though he were a dear, but sometimes exasperating, friend who still lived and breathed, and played tricks upon them.
    `We'll just have to puzzle it out, then,' Duraid declared with obvious relish. He loved the ancient game. It was his life's work.
--Wilbur Smith, The Seventh Scroll232

    The subjects of the Testaments, Old and New, are taken from very primitive and inartificial life. With the exception of the writings of Paul, and in a less degree Luke, there is little evidence of literary culture, or of a wide and varied range of thought, in their authors. They narrate plain facts, and they promulgate doctrines, profound indeed, but addressed less to the speculative and discursive, than to the moral and spiritual faculties; and hence, whatever may have been the capabilities of Hebrew and of classical Greek for other purposes, the vocabulary of the whole Bible is narrow in extent, and extremely simple in character. Now, in the early part of the sixteenth century, when the development of our religious dialect was completed, the English mind, and the English language, were generally in a state of culture much more analogous to that of the people and the tongues of Palestine than they have been at any other subsequent period. Two centuries later the native speech had been greatly subtilized, if not refined. Good vernacular words had been supplanted by foreign intruders, comprehensive ideas and their vocabulary had been split up into artificially discriminated thoughts, and a corresponding multitude of terms. The language in fact had become too copious, and too specific, to have any true correspondences with so simple and inartificial a diction as that of the Christian Scriptures. Had the Bible then for the first time appeared in an English dress, the translators would have been perplexed and confounded with the multitude of terms, each expressing a fragment, few the whole, of the meaning of the original words for which they must stand; and whereas, three hundred years ago, but one good translation was possible, the eighteenth century might have produced a dozen, none altogether good, but none much worse than another. We may learn from a paragraph in Trench what a different vocabulary the Bible would have displayed, if it had been first executed or thoroughly revised at that period. One commentator, he says, thought the phrase "clean escaped" a very low expression; another would reject "straightway, haply, twain, athirst, wax (in the sense of grow), lack, ensample, jeopardy, garner, passion," as obsolete; while the author of a new translation condemns as clownish, barbarous, base, hard, technical, misapplied, or new-coined, such words as beguile, boisterous, lineage, perseverance, potentate, remit, shorn, swerved, vigilant, unloose, unction, vocation, and hundreds of others now altogether approved and familiar.
--George P. Marsh, Lectures on the English Language233

THE KING JAMES VERSION DEFENDED234
by Edward F. Hills
    The King James Version Defended, by Edward F. Hills, is the best 20th Century Defense for the Textus Receptus (Received Text) and the King James Version of the Bible (better known as the Authorized Version). Available for the first time in electronic format, this book may be downloaded for personal use, with the kind permission of the Christian Research Press. Dr. Hills founded his arguments for the New Testament text squarely and solidly on the historic doctrines of the divine inspiration and providential preservation of Holy Scripture.
    PLEASE NOTE: That the text is © Copyright and may not be reproduced for sale or profit.
    But first, from page 218 of the book we offer these abbreviated six reasons why the King James Version should be retained:
  1. "...the English of the King James Version is not the English of the early 17th century. To be exact, it is not a type of English that was ever spoken anywhere. It is biblical English, which...owes its merit, not to 17th-century English--which was very different--but to its faithful translation of the original."
  2. "...the King James Version is enduring diction which will remain as long as the English language remains..."
  3. "...the current attack on the King James Version and the promotion of modern-speech versions is discouraging the memorization of the Scriptures, especially by children..."
  4. "...modern-speech Bibles are unhistorical and irreverent. The Bible is not a modern, human book...On the contrary, the Bible is an ancient, divine Book...Hence the language of the Bible should be venerable as well as intelligible, and the King James Version fulfills these two requirements better than any other Bible in English."
  5. "...modern speech Bibles are unscholarly. The language of the Bible has always savored of the things of heaven rather than the things of earth. It has always been biblical rather than contemporary and colloquial."
  6. "...the King James Version is the historic Bible of English-speaking Protestants. Upon it God, working providentially, has placed the stamp of His approval through the usage of many generations of Bible-believing Christians. Hence, if we believe in God's providential preservation of the Scriptures, we will retain the King James Version, for in so doing we will be following the clear leading of the Almighty."

Let me see if I am following what a certain preacher is saying. When I first heard him preach, in the park, he was using the NIV, but he told me I could go by the KJV if I wanted. Then after hearing some of the his sermons, I wrote and asked why the he didn't use the KJV more, as to me it seemed more appropriate. he replied that he had the liberty to use another version. I responded that while Christians do have much liberty, the Bible is what we have in common, that it is hard enough to reconcile all our differences got from the same Bible, without having different Bibles to boot. And the preacher eventually responded that many in the congregation use the NIV and he thinks it best to use it in the his sermons. Then for our church-in-the-parking-lot celebration a following Sunday, he used the RSV, and told us that sometimes the older versions are better. Finally, in his latest sermon the preacher used as an illustration that we should pick the regular coffee over the decaf, as full strength is better.

werewolf Now I am trying to sort this out. I read a recent news release about some villagers in India claiming to have seen a wolf come out of the forest then turn into a man and walk away. The authorities came up with an official version that the villagers had just seen a wolf, to which the villagers replied, yeah, but the wolf turned into a man and walked away.

I think of the villagers as giving me the full strength thriller version while the official one is decaffeinated. I mean, I am not going to lose any sleep over a story of someone seeing a wolf come out of the forest in India. Wouldn't trouble my slumber at all. But if the story says the wolf turned into a man and walked off, I might start wondering if maybe the man didn't get on a plane, or maybe he has some relatives in America.

Likewise, if someone starts telling a scary werewolf story, but has modernized the language to call it a man-wolf---oops!--person-wolf, I think I can handle it. My sleep would not be all that troubled by a story of a person-wolf traipsing around. In the politically correct fairy tales the children don't get eaten any more.

But if the story uses the old language, which I am nevertheless familiar with, I start thinking in terms of an ancient apocalypse in nature that maybe I should fear. Aren't we supposed to fear God? Isn't that what it means by staying awake, alert? And if it is better to avoid the decaf in favor of the regular, why is the preacher still using the NIV?

The scholar working on his manuscript has the genuine article in front of him to work with, not just the decaffeinated lore: photographs, microfilm. "Now, in the early part of the sixteenth century, when the development of our religious dialect was completed, the English mind, and the English language, were generally in a state of culture much more analogous to that of the people and the tongues of Palestine than they have been at any other subsequent period. Two centuries later the native speech had been greatly subtilized, if not refined." I couldn't think of a better analogy than to say the KJV is regular and the newer versions decaffeinated.

So if the preachers are saying the KJV is better, which it is, why are the preachers still preaching from the NIV? Doesn't the preacher want the his congregation to fear and reverence God?

    Joan brought in another cup of coffee on a silver tray and offered it to Bartholomew, who had, apparently, placed his order with her on arrival.
    Bartholomew sipped it. "Damned fine coffee," he said.
    There was something vaguely British about him, Stone thought, perhaps more than just the hand-tailored suit. "Thank you. We drink it strong around here."
    "The way I like it," the big man replied. "Never could understand that decaf crap. Like drinking nonalcoholic booze. Why bother?"
    Stone nodded and sipped his own coffee.
    "We don't have much time, Mr. Barrington, so I'll come to the point. I have a niece, my dead sister's only child, name of Erica Burroughs." He spelled the name. "She's twenty, dropped out of Mount Holyoke, involved with a young man named Lance Cabot."
    "Of the Massachusetts Cabots?"
    "He'd like people to think so, I'm sure, but no, no relation at all; doesn't even know them; I checked. Young Mr. Cabot, I'm reliably informed, earns his living by smuggling quantities of cocaine across international borders. Quantities small enough to conceal on his person or in his luggage, but large enough to bring him an income, you follow?"
    "I follow."
    "I'm very much afraid that Erica, besotted as she is, may be assisting him in his endeavors, and I don't want to see her end up in a British prison."
    "She's in Britain?"
    Bartolomew nodded. "London, living with Mr. Cabot, quite fancily, in a rented mews house in Mayfair." He opened a briefcase and handed Stone a file with a few sheets of paper inside. "Don't bother reading this now, there isn't time, but it contains everything I've been able to learn about Cabot, and something about Erica, as well. What I'd like you to do is go to London, persuade Erica to come back to New York with you, and, if it's possible without implicating Erica, get young Mr. Cabot arrested. I'd like him in a place where he can't get to Erica. For as long as possible, it goes without saying."
    "I see."
    "Will you undertake this task? You'll be very well paid, I assure you, and you will lack for no comfort while traveling."
    Stone didn't have to think long, and mostly what he thought about was Sarah Buckminster, another relationship he'd managed to f__k up, though it wasn't really his fault. "I will, Mr. Bartholomew, but you must understand that I will be pretty much limited to whatever persuasion I can muster, within the law, and whatever influence with the authorities I can scrape up. I won't kidnap your niece, and I won't harm Cabot, beyond whatever justice I can seek for him, based on crimes that are real and not imagined."
    "I understand perfectly, Mr. Barrington. I'm well aware that you are a respectable attorney and not a thug for hire. I'm also informed, by a number of people, Samuel Bernard among them, that you are a resourceful man and that your background as a police detective gives you entrée to certain places."
    "Sometimes," Stone admitted, "but not always. There are limits to what an ex-policeman can do."
    "I understand. I simply want you to do whatever you can."
    "On that basis, I'll go," Stone said. ...
--Stuart Woods, The Short Forever235

It seems to me that the preacher's sermon on decaf is eminently applicable to Bible selection.

REVELATION

    The God whom we worship is neither an aspect or force of nature, nor is He an invention of legend and myth. He is a living Person who reveals Himself in history in the concrete situations and events of our common life. The Bible is the record of that historical revelation; and in reading and expounding it we come into direct relation with that revelation. The Bible is the source and fountain of the truth that we believe and the hope by which we live. Without it our worship, no less than our Faith, would wither and die.
--Massey H. Shepherd, Jr., The Worship of the Church236

We do not want that "source and fountain of the truth" to be "scairt" like decaffeinated coffee, nonalcoholic booze, dead works, heartless worship.

If I can substitute potent drink for strong coffee and the salt mine for the pits there's a country song fitting the sermon: Alan Jackson - It's 5 o'clock somewhere The real story

If we take the word of God as that strong medicine to keep us from going insane, then I say it's five o'clock somewhere. By that I am referring to the fact that the Bible dialect à la KJV is not the English dialect spoken in the early 17th century or at any other time in history, but it was made through the centuries, from Wycliffe to Tyndale to the KJV team, to best correspond to the state of Biblical languages as they were spoken by the men of God who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, in the tongue and to the people of God's timing and choosing. A lunchtime cocktail just doesn't quite capture it. But it's five o 'clock somewhere, and I seriously doubt if the Lord has any disagreement with me going to the King James Version.

I follow the thought of, (Zech. 13:2-5) "And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land. And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive: But he shall say, I am no prophet, I am an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth." I don't think modernity--modern speech--is an idol to be worshipped. Since the NIV lies to us, in the name of the Lord, I take a few pokes at it from time to time. And I do not let the cover of my own copy deceive but have pasted over the word HOLY so my copy says, PROFANE BIBLE.

Our teacher made a point in his last Sunday school class, that our leaders watch out for our souls, (Heb. 13:17) "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." A sister in class pointed out that in her interlinear Bible: The King James, the Revised Standard, and the Living all say pretty much the same thing, but the New International Version leaves out the word soul: "They keep watch over you." The NIV is that scairt coffee the preacher tells us not to choose.

I see it as my mission to use what persuasion I can to get God's people weaned from the NIV, and then to try to put Zondervan out of business so they can't hurt anyone. But I'm sort of like that ex-cop who only has so much influence. As long as the preachers are not setting a good official example, there is only so much I can do within my fellowship.

[TOP]



Click here to bookmark this page.

Refresh this page to see the new bookmark below:
html gear
View My Guestbook
Sign My Guestbook


Author:

Earl Gosnell
Box 3492
Eugene, OR 97403

Contact: feedbackatbibles.n7nz.org

Copyright © 2003, Earl S. Gosnell III

Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence.

Permission is hereby granted to use the portions original to this paper--with credit given, of course--in intellectually honest non-profit educational material. The material I myself have quoted has its own copyright in most cases, which I cannot speak for but have used here under the fair use doctrine.

I have used material from a number of sources for teaching, comment and illustration in this nonprofit teaching endeavor. The sources are included in a notes file. Such uses must be judged on individual merit, of course, so I cannot say how other uses of the same material might fare.

Any particular questions or requests for permissions may be addressed to me, the author.

Scripture quotations marked NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION or NIV are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved.

Web page problems?
Contact: webfootsteratbibles.n7nz.org

Enable graphics to view counter visitors since 8/1/2006

Valid HTML 4.01!