Isaiah 40: 21 Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
23 That bringeth the princes to nothing; he maketh the judges of the earth as vanity.
24 Yea, they shall not be planted; yea, they shall not be sown: yea, their stock shall not take root in the earth: and he shall also blow upon them, and they shall wither, and the whirlwind shall take them away as stubble.
25 To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.
26 Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.
27 Why sayest thou, O Jacob, and speakest, O Israel, My way is hid from the LORD, and my judgment is passed over from my God?
28 Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.
29 He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength.
30 Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall:
31 But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "A Changing Gospel in a Changeless World":
Dr. Jackson,
Any thoughts on Concordia's new "Lutheran Study Bible"? They are promoting it as the first Lutheran only study Bible, but they also use the term "pan-Lutheran", which makes me nervous. I'm unfamiliar with the ESV translation that this study Bible uses.
---
John has left a new comment on your post "A Changing Gospel in a Changeless World":
Dr. Jackson,
You mention KJV, NIV, Beck and ESV.
How do you feel about the New King James Version?
***
GJ - Pardon my summary judgment, but I put all translations into two families - King James and Other. I believe the ESV is a version of the RSV, the first translation to remove the Virgin Birth from Isaiah 7.
The original King James is a version of the Tyndale, who was burned for his trouble. Faithfulness to the Word is always accompanied by the cross, while apostasy is rewarded with money and worldly honors. Ask Church and Change if this is not true.
William Tyndale
William Tyndale Overview
The Early Years of William Tyndale
Early Controversy Surrounding Tyndale
William Tyndale First Prints The Scripture in English
So the KVJ is really an official version of the Tyndale, and Tyndale is directly linked to Luther himself.
The KJV we use today is an updated version of the original, so there is no sin in updating it again. However, the non-Lutherans love the KJV and they produce all the updated KJVs, such as the New KJV, KJV II, etc. Those variations have adopted the Reformed elimination of the Sacraments and change "teach all nations" into "make disciples." As one Lutheran observed, "They know their market."
People tolerate the sacraments in the old KJV but the same wording disappears in the newer versions. "Baptism now saves you" - that has to go. "Communion with the body of Christ" - vanished.
If someone has not grown up with the old KJV and does not know German, the New KJV is a good solution. I have yet to see any other modern effort better than the New KJV.
I know the old KJV has readings that would simply baffle any younger reader, but so does Shakespeare. Anyone can compare the New KJV to the older one to see what some peculiar wordings actually mean.
After we confess all the supposed faults of the old KJV, can anyone read the above passage from Isaiah and not get goosebumps?
Paul McCain, colporteur of the LCMS, may hype their newest product, but I am reminded of the Concordia One Volume Commentary, based on the wretched NIV. The book denied key Messianic passages in the Psalms. One of the key editors bragged afterward that upon retiring from Concordia Seminary as a professor, he could say anything he wanted. He denied Luther's justification by faith in favor of some Romanizing version. That was Robert Hoerber.
McCain and Barry were key players in allowing the Church Shrinkage Movement to take over the LCMS, while posing as conservatives. They also did nothing about LCMS Pentecostalism and Benke's pan-religious unionism.
McCain now has a grand total of three years as a parish pastor, most of the time spent campaigning for Al Barry, conniving with Herman Otten while denying and bragging about it. Schlepping books is not a divine call.
Sure, I would buy any book McCain recommends! After I win the lottery, and I never play the lottery.
Not getting behind a new Lutheran KJV was a disaster for WELS, Missouri, and the ELS. Not backing the New KJV (lazy, cheap alternative for synod executives) was another major mistake.
---
RSV Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
***
GJ - It is worth noting that all new versions feel free to change their publications willy-nilly. I was reading the NKJV at one service in Nicollet and again in New Ulm. I was startled by a word change. Imagination? Too much coffee? Not enough? I checked the next week. The two NKJVs disagreed. The NIV has been all over the place with its trendier versions. Willow Creek demanded a feminist version and would not order Bibles unless the Word of God agreed with Hybels - typical Church Growth thinking.
Another value of the KJV was its consistency from one generation to the next, making memorization relatively easy. How does one memorize a version where changes are made annually?
I wrote in another post that most--if not all--new versions accept the fantasy textual criticism started by Wescott-Hort and carried on by new generations of theological fiction writers. They expel the Byzantine tradition (Greek Christian Empire for 1100 years) because there are so many Byzantine manuscripts. They slobber on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus because one man fortuitously (?) found them and made his reputation with them, even though no one really knows the origin of either one. And to top it off - these two great, perfect, best manuscripts do not agree with each other.
Where did lack of trust in the revealed Word of God start? Wescott and Hort. Let me know if a modern version (apart from the KJV family) disavows the snip and clip of the modernists. For verification, look at the footnotes in the NIV, including the ending of Mark.