Discussion in 'Pastoral Resources' started by Sean611, Jul 26, 2012.
Wow! That is one heretical liturgy. I'll stick to my 1962 BCP thank you.
Please let us know--what are you referring to?
The SCLM Daily Prayer book, lots of omissions and pagan sounding language in there
I have enjoyed reading the Day by Day devotionals for many years. I think it is properly a reflection of the Episcopal Church itself in that some articles are rather liberal while others very traditional. Recall one article gave a wonderful discourse on a bit of scripture that could have been written by Hooker himself and on the next page was some postmodern work about one's reflections on a Winter solstice service he had been to. Both were inciteful in their own ways.
Winter Solstice service, hmmm. Sounds pagan to me, after all before I was saved and an Anglican, I was a solitary Druid
Sounded that way to me as well, which is why I thought the juxtaposition was so striking. But then Druidism has been floating around in the church a bit for a while: http://churchman.blogspot.com/2005/04/druid-anglican-communion.html
1 Corinthians 10:16-22 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
The Message bible is a paraphrase translation by Eugene Peterson, and I'm surprised they're using that over their beloved NRSV. One of my mentors as a teen was Fr. John Eigenbrodt, who was a Theology Professor at Depaw, and he would cringe at some of the glaring mis-translations, especially pertaining to gender in the NRSV. Some may disagree, but for clarity and accuracy, I still prefer the NKJV. As to the original post question, I've only recently started to read the Forward Day by Day again and so far it's been a blessing, but I also read it in the context of an individual's opinion/experience, not a doctrinal statement.
I love the kjv. Nothing else compares imo
I'm still a fan of the tried and true KJV.
I love the KJV but I also use the ESV too, it is a better translation than the NRSV, and it seems to be the (Official) bible used by ACNA and ANiC
I absolutely agree. I use the ESV on my Kindle and have found only a few issues with it. It's also much more understandable for my kids, so that's what we use when we read together. I don't care for the NIV and the NRSV bibles I find are so darn expensive.
I've also heard good things about the ESV, what is their manuscript support? I stayed with the NKJV since they were a re-translation of the Textus Receptus.
What I love most about the KJV is it is public domain. I don't like the idea of needing permission to quote God's word. I also believe one of the enemies tools to hamper the Gospel is to retranslate it and reinterpret it so many ways that it loses all unity, currency (in the since that it has value in echange), and authority among Christians as well as those seeking the truth in the Gospel.