I’m listening to Part 4 right now, and have enjoyed this series so far. However, I could do without the following comment by Dr. Bauder-
Let’s talk about worldliness directly. Do you realize in the Bible, the term ‘worldliness’ is never used? In fact, the term ‘worldly’, at least in the King James Bible, only occurs twice. And I mention the King James Bible only because it’s people who use the King James Bible who are most likely to talk about worldliness anyway.
I think he’s right, though… but if he is, it’s an indictment of those who are not KJV users that they are, on average, less interested in reflecting on worldliness.
(Edit: OK, maybe it’s not an indictment, because he would probably argue that exclusive KJV use tends to correlate w/talking about worldliness too much… but I think the case can certainly be made that the rest of us probably do not take it seriously enough.)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer] I think he’s right, though… but if he is, it’s an indictment of those who are not KJV users that they are, on average, less interested in reflecting on worldliness.
(Edit: OK, maybe it’s not an indictment, because he would probably argue that exclusive KJV use tends to correlate w/talking about worldliness too much… but I think the case can certainly be made that the rest of us probably do not take it seriously enough.)
So… why is it amusing that KJB users are more likely to talk about worldliness (an interesting assumption, to be sure), in spite of the fact that the exact word is not in the text, and the word ‘worldly’ is only used twice? Was there a point to his barb, or is it just that KJB users are Fundamentalism’s red-headed stepchildren and an acceptable target for mockery? Could someone explain how this comment was 1) pertinent 2) edifying?
BTW, I’ve been listening and taking notes- I have 3 pages so far. It is good stuff, and I appreciate CBTS posting these audio files online for free.
Well, I can’t really speak to the humor positively. Haven’t heard the statement you referred to. I suspect the humor rises from perceived irony that the folks who talk most about topic A have the least reason to from the standpoint of the English Bible they’re using… and some other translations have the word “worldly” more frequently, yet those who use them tend to talk about the subject less. Occurrences of “worldly” in the NT: KJV: 2 NAS: 5 ESV: 7 NIV: 10
I guess my pulpit translation is worst on that topic? … NKJV: 1
But if folks want to have a word-count duel, KJV has more references to “world” in a negative sense because it frequently renders aionos as “world” where most others emphasize the temporal aspect of the word more and render it “age.” (Didn’t look them up to see how many were negative, but I got 242 hits on “world” in KJV compared to 208 in ESV… My Libronix is still churning away so I don’t have the NIV number yet. I’m still on Logos 3 and run it a Windows virtual box because Logos hasn’t made it for Linux yet… )
But, yes, it’s a bit silly really, because KJV just uses “of the world” rather than the adverb “worldly” in a ton of those passages. Both terms are ambiguous and require explanation based on their individual contexts and the overall context of Scripture. So… the perceived irony is a bit of a stretch.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Discussion
NewPart 4
The crowd snickers.
Scenescape Media
NewPoint
(Edit: OK, maybe it’s not an indictment, because he would probably argue that exclusive KJV use tends to correlate w/talking about worldliness too much… but I think the case can certainly be made that the rest of us probably do not take it seriously enough.)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
NewEvidence
So… why is it amusing that KJB users are more likely to talk about worldliness (an interesting assumption, to be sure), in spite of the fact that the exact word is not in the text, and the word ‘worldly’ is only used twice? Was there a point to his barb, or is it just that KJB users are Fundamentalism’s red-headed stepchildren and an acceptable target for mockery? Could someone explain how this comment was 1) pertinent 2) edifying?
BTW, I’ve been listening and taking notes- I have 3 pages so far. It is good stuff, and I appreciate CBTS posting these audio files online for free.
Scenescape Media
NewIrony?
Occurrences of “worldly” in the NT:
KJV: 2
NAS: 5
ESV: 7
NIV: 10
I guess my pulpit translation is worst on that topic? … NKJV: 1
But if folks want to have a word-count duel, KJV has more references to “world” in a negative sense because it frequently renders aionos as “world” where most others emphasize the temporal aspect of the word more and render it “age.” (Didn’t look them up to see how many were negative, but I got 242 hits on “world” in KJV compared to 208 in ESV… My Libronix is still churning away so I don’t have the NIV number yet. I’m still on Logos 3 and run it a Windows virtual box because Logos hasn’t made it for Linux yet… )
But, yes, it’s a bit silly really, because KJV just uses “of the world” rather than the adverb “worldly” in a ton of those passages. Both terms are ambiguous and require explanation based on their individual contexts and the overall context of Scripture. So… the perceived irony is a bit of a stretch.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
NewNot sure either...
Scenescape Media
NewGranted
Scenescape Media