LCBP reject PCE

King James Bible information (Moderators only)

LCBP reject PCE

Postby bibleprotector » 26 May 2014, 23:24

http://www.localchurchbiblepublishers.c ... n-pce-text

Apparently, the main reason why they think the PCE is wrong (in regards to 1 John 5:8), is because Cambridge University Press in America sent someone this letter June 3, 1985, in which the oress admits to changing the word "spirit" to "Spirit",

“I don't know how to say this to you other than to be perfectly honest. We are very grateful to you even though you have put your finger on a matter of some embarras[s]ment regarding the lower case 's' in Spirit, reference 1Jn.,5:8.

“There is no way of knowing how many years this particular edition has carried the misprint. Our Bible department in England was astounded that this has never been noticed before. I assumed some mysterious theological question was involved and overlooked the obvious in my search of commentaries.

“This error of course, will be corrected in subsequent printings thanks to your sharp eyes. Again, we are very grateful.”

It is signed, Jerry L. Hooper.

Having some regard to the quality of the work of LCBP, and to the good work of Cambridge in the past, it is sad and bad that they have both now committed to this position.

ANSWER

The above letter is hardly evidence that the King James Bible should be wrong to have lowercase “s” on the word “spirit” in 1 John 5:8, because:

1. Nearly all normal Cambridge Bibles from 1629 to 1985 had “spirit”.

2. The change was made out of ignorance of tradition, and was made oblivious to the fact that the proper use had been common in many King James Bibles, and was there that way by purpose and reason, especially since that rendering appeared throughout the earlier part of the twentieth century. That is to say, the reason for change is whimsical.

3. The contextual, structural and interpretive reasonings indicate that lower case “spirit” there is correct.

4. The use of lower case “spirit” is observed in many other places in the King James Bible today. (One thinks they would be at a loss to explain Joel 2:28, 29 as compared to Acts 2:17, 18, or else 1 Cor. 2:12 in its context.)

5. If Cambridge happened to be printing a King James Bible which was regarded as right at every other place, why would it have been wrong at one place and altered in that manner in 1985? It is much more reasonable to argue that the process of editing which came out of the Oxford 1769 Edition and the Cambridge editions leading to the beginning of the twentieth century were already settling any last issue, and that the great witness of the Pure Cambridge Edition throughout the twentieth century should not suddenly be regarded as nothing because of some foolhardy decision to change the very words of God.

I know there are some people who think the issue does not matter, or who are not resolved on what exactly is correct. But where people make their decisions on such flimsy grounds (and against the desire of their own potential allies and market), it means that we must see others raised up to do the greater works, and ourselves examples for the truth, hopefully yet convincing these also.

The Bible is in danger of further changes also. (Cambridge has already passed to the Church the proper edition of the KJB, so they have no need, nor now right, to change it.) But that is why we protect the Bible.

"Let them shout for joy, and be glad, that favour my righteous cause: yea, let them say continually, Let the LORD be magnified, which hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant." (Psalm 35:27).
____________________________________________
http://www.bibleprotector.com
bibleprotector
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 146
Joined: 26 May 2014, 15:31
Location: Australia

Return to King James Bible

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron