The Lord's Prayer is in perpetual error
Read Kevin Sam's post and see if you agree: The Lord's Prayer is in perpetual error
posted by David Ker at 7:35 AM
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Contributors
Subscribe (Atom):
- to Posts
- to All Comments
To subscribe to comments on individual posts, use the link at the end of each post.
Surveys
English Quality of Bibles Survey
Previous Posts
- new poll
- Mecha Manga Bible
- This Bible is a riot
- Is somebody shutting the gate at Bible Gateway?
- Bible translation and importing N.T. meanings to O...
- NLT Blog: Sentence Structure in the NLT
- NLT Study Bible vs. ESV Study Bible- Introducing t...
- NLT Study Bible and Mark 11:13-14
- Which NLT are you reading?
- NLT Study Bible, ESV Study Bible, NIV Study Bible,...
Topics
3 Comments:
like inerrancy, the claim to error in the LP is nonsense to me.
Kevin is certainly correct in terms of the original text. That doesn't invalidate us closing our own prayers with a suitable doxology.
Well, it's probably the best case study for asking questions about when we call the canon closed. Are these words acceptable? How about the woman caught in adultery in John 8? Historically these passages have been esteemed and accepted so calling them "not original" and then rejecting them seems wrong.
This morning I was reading the beatitudes with my kids from Matthew and Luke. We were asking questions about why each evangelist recorded Jesus' words that way rather than "which were the original words of Jesus."
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home