A play on words, rhetorical gimmickry, or blasphemy?

Posted by John L. Rothra on September 29, 2009 under Theology | Comments are off for this article

Who do you pledge to serve?

Posted by John L. Rothra on September 4, 2009 under Devotional/Teaching | Comments are off for this article

I recently came across a video of numerous Hollywood stars making various pledges. Most of the video is fairly benign, but about three-fourths of the way through, people begin pledging their allegiance and service to… well… check it out:

Unlike these people, me and my family will pledge our allegiance to only one man, and that man is not Barack Obama. That man is not a Democrat at all; he is not a Republican nor a Libertarian. In fact, that man never ran for political office. We agree with the lyrics of this song and pledge our allegiance only to one person:

Scripture says we are either slaves/servants of sin or slaves/servants of Christ. Serving the former may be temporarily fun, but it is eternally deadly. Serving the latter brings freedom to the sinner, life to the believer, and hope to the redeemed. It does not mean we are perfect, only that we can now live free from the burden of sin, free from its shackles, and free from hell.

Serving the Lamb is a joy, a pleasure, not just a duty. God does not force anyone to accept Jesus, he enables you to. I believe though, that once you realize the complete joy and wonderful love that he offers, you’ll want to accept Jesus and serve him!

Coming revision of NIV may be good, may not be

Posted by John L. Rothra on September 1, 2009 under Devotional/Teaching, Featured | Comments are off for this article

I just saw an article that the very popular New International Version (NIV) will be revised. Based on the article, the translating committee recogized some of the problems that arose from the TNIV which opened a virtual hornet’s nest of heated debate.

Will a new, updated NIV be acceptable? It may very well be. However, it may be troublesome. I suspect that debate will rage among conservative evangelicals. Some will argue that anything short of a literal translation is unacceptable and maybe even tantamount to changing Scripture. Others will argue that updating antiquated English terms is a necessary step in maintaining accuracy. Another group will argue that literal is incomprehensible, only a strongly dynamically equivalent translation will suffice.

And so goes the debate of translational processes.

I will reserve judgment on the upcoming new NIV until it comes out. I would also caution regarding those who are absolutely for and absolutely against a new version, especially before it is published.

This pastor believes there is nothing wrong with updating the English language. The widely popular “literal” version NASB did just that. Translators went and developed the NKJV (less a cleanup and more a re-doing of the KJV) so people can have what is essentially an updated KJV. Both the NKJV and updated NASB are accepted. I pray that the new NIV will also be acceptable. I also pray that scholars heed the advice of Paul and Augustine: don’t get so wrapped up in arguing the finest details of words and letters and thus overlook the big picture of what the words and letters say about God.