Saturday, January 01, 2011

Archbishop of Canterbury's New Year Message 2011



In his annual New Year address, The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, looks forward to the year ahead and the 400th anniversary year of one of the most important books in history - the King James Bible. Dr Williams reflects on how the King James Bible can offer a vital 'big picture' for our lives and for David Cameron's 'Big Society'.

It has been described as the single most important publication in whole of history: it was the book which laid the foundations of the United Kingdom. This year, a series of events will be held to mark the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible which was 'made by the whole island to be used by the whole island'.

The Authorised Version today is not the text which was published in 1611. Hundreds of changes in vocabulary, grammar, spelling and punctuation have been made.

There were some notable errors in the 1611 version:

Instead of having the parables of vineyards, we had the parables of vinegar.

A further print run is 1631 by the Royal Printers had a rather more serious omission: they missed the word 'not' out in the 7th commandment, such that it read: 'Thou shalt commit adultery'.

What is published now is the version revised by Benjamin Blayney, an Oxford man, in 1769, and quietly adopted by printers.

Words not in the original Hebrew and Greek, but added by translators to elucidate the sense, were inserted in small Roman type, in italics.

Four hundred years ago, such a font was considered to appear subsidiary in importance. Our use of italics today is to emphasise, so the modern editions, with the print in Roman and these added words in italics, give the opposite impression of what the translators intended.

Yet there is something of the majesty and grandeur of God Himself in this translation: its cadences are poetic perfection and its vocabulary is a breath away from divinity. Coming during the life of Shakespeare, in the years immediately following his greatest tragedies and his richest poetry, one senses the imprimatur of the Bard himself upon the heavenly spark of Godhead.

In her Christmas broadcast, Her Majesty the Queen reminded us that it was commissioned by her ancestor James VI of Scotland and I of England. This was Britain's Chalcedon, which brought brief respite from certain theological tensions and ecclesial conflagrations which were a mark of the era. Like the Book of Common Prayer, the Authorised Version facilitated a measure of unity.

These works remain the bedrock and foundation of the Church of England, while Jesus remains its cornerstone and the Monarch its Supreme Governor. The King James Version of the Bible is worth celebrating because it is a national treasure which ranks with our greatest achievements. Let us thank God for those who were tortured and died that we might have the Holy Scriptures in the vernacular. And let us that God that the vernacular which is preserved is that of the English language at its zenith.

71 Comments:

Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Bible is just Greek for book, that which we call the Bible was originally known as Holy Writ.

The King James 1611 is a Kings Writ, which can be entered into Law.

I think HMQII gave a sneaky nod to the Lawful Rebellion your Grace.

1 January 2011 at 13:36  
Blogger Chancellor More said...

Dear Cranmer

Very interesting 'errors' perchance having a sybolism beyond a mere human error in translation.

“Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani” (Mark 15:35),the soldiers heard Him crying.

"Someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink"

“Let us see whether Elijah will come to take Him down.”And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last. 38And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom"

So too adultery when one considers the metaphor of the church of Christ.

"For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh."
This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church."

I wish you well in this year of Our Lord, 2011.

"God's Servant First"

1 January 2011 at 13:41  
Anonymous len said...

It is without doubt we owe a debt of gratitude to all those who gave their lives so that we could have the Word of God in written form.
Satan did all he could to prevent Gods word being made available to all who seek the Truth.

The Bible contains all that we need to know concerning life, Godliness, and salvation. Being complete and unalterable, it then is our only source for establishing what God has authorized. Those who claim the right to modify its teachings have taken on its curse (Galatians 1:8-9).

1 January 2011 at 14:10  
Anonymous len said...

Peter warned, "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty ... And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (II Peter 1:16, 19-21). The words delivered by the apostles were not their own opinions by the words of God. As Paul told the Galatians, "But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ" (Galatians 1:11-12). And once delivered, they were not to be altered. "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:6-9).

This is why the written Word of God is so vital for Humanity seeking Truth and why the Powers of Darkness have done all in their power to prevent it,a battle which still rages today!!

1 January 2011 at 14:16  
Blogger Edward Spalton said...

Your Grace,

I understood Establishment completely from the age of four. I was walking with my father to the parish Church. We passed a Methodist chapel where the singing sounded a great deal more fun than anything I had ever heard before.

"Daddy, Can we go to that church"
Father: "No"
I repeated the question (which was not really expected, an answer having been give) and asked why not.
Father: "Because we go to the same sort of Church the King goes to and that's quite good enough for anybody".

I fear the C of E will lose its unique selling point, if it is ever disestablished.

1 January 2011 at 14:18  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Len said 1 January 2011 14:10 & 1 January 2011 14:16

Truth indeed.

May the Lord exalt His Word which endureth Forever and Ever.
Psalm 34:3
3 O magnify the LORD with me, and let us exalt his name together.
Psalm 119:160
160 Thy word [is] true [from] the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments [endureth] for ever.
Psalm 99:9
9 Exalt the LORD our God, and worship at his holy hill; for the LORD our God [is] holy.
Psalm 7:17
17 I will give thanks to the LORD because of his righteousness and will sing praise to the name of the LORD Most High.

Amen.

Edward Spalton said 1 January 2011 14:18

'Father: "Because we go to the same sort of Church the King goes to and that's quite good enough for anybody".

It is important to go to a church where worship is based on God's Word and THE KING OF KINGS IS PRESENT. It ONCE was, when men like J C RYLE preached and the singing reached as a glorious sweet incense unto the Lord in heaven!

Matthew 18:20
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

1 January 2011 at 14:47  
Blogger Caedmon's Cat said...

While I acknowledge that the culture of this country owes a great deal to the C of E - this is not the only factor. The various dissenters also played a considerable part in the imprint which the Gospel made on our values. I struggle with the concept of a 'national' church; it reeks of the Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox hegemonies that sprang from Constantine's alleged conversion to the faith. Big Church allied with Big State has always meant Big Bully - on many occasions in history to the cost of Christian lives. So I wouldn't lose any sleep over disestablishment, since I set no store by the state either.

1 January 2011 at 14:58  
Anonymous Atlas shrugged said...

Matthew 18:20
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

However you do not seem to notice a contradiction here?

Gods word, has little, and often nothing to do with what is preached at a RC pulpit. Which cannot be the word of Jesus Christ, ( the new testament of the Bible, just incase you needed reminding ) it is the word of The RCC, and so that of the Pope in Rome, who believes himself to be the WORD of God, and therefore GOD himself.

REAL Christians gather together in a CONGREGATION not a church. Which, as a general rule, should be limited to only, community, family members, and/or close friends. All else is collectivist, therefore easily corrupted, and so potentially dangerous.

There exists many mistranslations from the original texts. One of the most fundamental, and serious ones being where the word congregation was replaced with the word church.

The CofE is supposed to be a PROTESTANT form of the Christian Faith, hopefully uncorrupted by one world papal dictatorship.

The exact same reasons for which the CofE was set up in the first place, exist today, and are IMO even more important then they were back in 1611 or indeed somewhat earlier. The counter reformation started the very same day the reformation reached its summit.

The RCC play a long game, especially those that subverted it as far back as 550 odd years ago.

Many nations, not just the British one, have time, and time again sort to rid their realms of this subversion, but have ultimately failed to do so.

The list seems endless, but here are just a few that spring to mind, Germany, Sweden, Holland, England, France, Mexico, Cuba, Spain, Russia, The USA, Japan, China, even Italy itself.

If we are not very careful indeed we will all fall into yet another FASCIST dark age. Our modern day counter reformation, more commonly known as the NWO is here.

The pope is not sovereign, he only appears to be. He is in reality a prisoner of this subversion, a mere figure head for World Zionist/Fascist ambition.

Please note this is subversion, it has nothing to do with ordinary Roman Catholics or indeed many brave souls, who have in the past been leaders of, or within The RCC.

This battle within the RCC, has been going on for as long as 1500 years, however the battle as well as the war has now IMO, been lost.

You have been warned, I do not however expect many if indeed any of you to properly read this, never mind in anyway fully understand it.

1 January 2011 at 16:06  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Atlas shrugged said

However you do not seem to notice a contradiction here?(I DO NOT AND WILL SHOW YOU)

Gods word, has little, and often nothing to do with what is preached at a RC pulpit.(AGREED AS AN EX CATHOLIC) Which cannot be the word of Jesus Christ, ( the new testament of the Bible, just incase you needed reminding ) (I DO NOT BUT CHRIST SPEAKS THROUGHOUT THE OLD AND NEW. HE IS THE WORD OF GOD) it is the word of The RCC, and so that of the Pope in Rome, who believes himself to be the WORD of God, and therefore GOD himself.(YES, I KNOW AND HAVE SPOKE OUT ABOUT THIS)

REAL Christians gather together in a CONGREGATION not a church.(THEY CAN BE EITHER) Which, as a general rule, should be limited to only, community, family members, and/or close friends.(TRUE BELIEVERS ARE INDIVIDUALLY SAVED BUT HAVE YOU NOT HEARD OR READ ABOUT THE MUSTARD SEED) All else is collectivist, therefore easily corrupted, and so potentially dangerous.(NO, UNBELIEVERS WHO SAY JESUS BUT DO NOT BELIEVE ARE ENTWINED WITH US BUT ONLY CHRIST CAN SEPERATE..WHEAT/TARES)

There exists many mistranslations from the original texts. One of the most fundamental, and serious ones being where the word congregation was replaced with the word church.(THIS IS NOT CORRECT AS IT CAN BE TRANSLATED AS EITHER BUT DOES 'NO HARM' TO DOCTRINE).
'The RCC play a long game, especially those that subverted it as far back as 550 odd years ago.'(IT DOES INDEED).
'The pope is not sovereign, he only appears to be(TRUTH). He is in reality a prisoner of this subversion, a mere figure head for World Zionist/Fascist ambition.'(GIBBERISH UNFOUNDED STATEMENT, YOU ARE LED WRONGLY BY YOUR STATEMENT).
'This battle within the RCC, has been going on for as long as 1500 years, however the battle as well as the war has now IMO, been lost.' (IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE RCC DESIRE TO RULE TEMPORALLY THE LIVES OF MANKIND, NO BATTLE HAS BEEN LOST OR CONCEDED BY ROME!!)

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

1 January 2011 at 16:33  
Anonymous Anna said...

The KJV is beautiful language - but contains at least this notable error: Acts 12:4 translates the Greek word, 'pesach' (meaning passover) as Easter...whether for political and/or traditional purposes, I haven't found out.

1 January 2011 at 16:34  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Edward Spalton @ 14.18

Amen to that!


The James' Bible was always much, much more than a protestant construct designed to merge church with state. It's heritage being a thousand years of disaffection, from Augustine, the Synod of Whitby, to Wycliffe and Lollardy.

It was a long time coming.

1 January 2011 at 17:01  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

KINGOFHIGHCR
Atlas shrugged

Scripture for you to consider.

"And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. "

"And I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed, even in heaven.”

“I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth."

"And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."

"Then he opened their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures."

“And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers.”

"But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written."

1 January 2011 at 17:30  
Anonymous Atlas shugged said...

KINGOFHIGHCS said.

You say little other then to state that I am wrong, mislead, or just plane stupid.

BTW have you actually done any actual research on the subject of Zionism, as I suggested?

I can clearly see that you have not even attempted to do so.

OK perhaps I can help.

Please get a copy of a book by Eric Jon Phelps, called Vatican Assassins, then read it.

Eric is a REAL Christian, I only state this just incase you may want to become one yourself someday in the future.

Mr Eman

Not quite sure what in the hell you are getting at, as is usually the case when people quote disjointed Roman Empire corrupted scripture completely our of all context at me. But then that was most likely why you did it.

"And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. "

"And I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed, even in heaven.”

However these are completely out of context, and so deny what Peter did once he understood what he had created.

Which was a WHORE, and a follower of Satan. Or should I say Saturn?

Sorry I should not try to make you people think any more then you are capable. Just get the above book and read it.

Then if you can then pick important holes in his life time of work, as a committed Christian, so be it. I will await an infinitely more informed debate, with much anticipation.

1 January 2011 at 18:14  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

Chancellor More

You overlooked a number of other errors.

The 'Judas Bible' of 1611 - the inerrent word of God?

(1611) "Judas” for “Jesus” in Mat. 26:36

(1611),"Fool" Bible, Psalm 14:1, "The fool hath said in his heart there is a God" instead of "there is no God."

(1807), "Ears to ear" Bible, (Mat. 13:43, "ears to ear" instead of "to hear."

(1631,)"Wicked" Bible, (Ex. 20:14, omits the "not.")

(1653), "Unrighteous" Bible, (1 Cor. 6:9, "unrighteous shall inherit.")

(1711), "Profit" Bible, (Isa. 57:12, "shall profit" instead of "shall not profit.")


(1716), "Sin On" Bible, (John 5:14, "sin on more" for "sin no more.")

1 January 2011 at 18:15  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Mr Eman said

You have been answered repeatly about your false claims about Apostle Peter and THE Church of Rome but you refuse to learn.

History for you to consider.

1 Where did peter stay in Rome
2 when did he visit Rome and establish the church
3 when was he established as the Bishop of Rome,
4 who was the immediate predecessor after he was killed, NAME HIM, showing continuity of your claim FOR THE BLESSED CHAIR HE SAT ON??

I await your detailing from verified historical records other than Rome's myths.!

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

1 January 2011 at 18:21  
Blogger Tambourine Man said...

Stop firing at each other. Soooo booooring!!!

The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind
The answer is blowin’ in the wind

Yes, ’n’ how many seas must a white dove sail
Before she sleeps in the sand?

Yes, ’n’ how many times must the cannonballs fly
Before they’re forever banned?

How many years can a mountain exist
Before it’s washed to the sea?
Yes, ’n’ how many times can a man turn his head
Pretending he just doesn’t see?

How many times must a man look up
Before he can see the sky?
Yes, ’n’ how many ears must one man have
Before he can hear people cry?

1 January 2011 at 18:31  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

1 January 2011 at 18:41  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

KINGOFHIGHCR

Never mind that for now; you'll just disagree anyway. 'History' was mainly by oral 'tradition' back then - or didn't you know this?

Now, while I research this, please explain the scriptural texts - neither you nor len have so far. Instead, you just throwing insults my way about the Universal Church.

Ps - re: an earlier post on another stream - can you give me the scriptural texts referencing the 'rapture'?

1 January 2011 at 18:43  
Blogger Little Black Sambo said...

"So I wouldn't lose any sleep over disestablishment"
Thanks for sharing that.

1 January 2011 at 18:53  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Mr Eman said

So you want me to answer your errors listed, obviously where they were errors, Quod Erat Demonstrandum, they were spotted as such..such as the "The Books of the Apocrypha".(DESPERATELY TRYING TO KEEP CATHOLICS HAPPY BUT INTRODUCING ERROR..THERE SHOULD 'ONLY' BE UNITY IN TRUTH, EVER!!
THIS CLUTCH OF BOOKS IS OBVIOUSLY UNINSPIRED EVEN TO ME WHEN READ AS A CATHOLIC AT THE TIME!!!)

I AM BUSY AT PRESENT BUT IT WILL BE MY JOY TO SHOW YOU THE TRUTH.

YOU QUOTE SCRIPTURE WHEN IT SUITS YOU BUT THE BIBLE GOES UNREAD AND UNCARED ABOUT BY CATHOLICS AS TRADITION IS EQUAL TO THE WORD OF GOD IN ROMAN CATHOLICISM BUT INFALLIBLE POPES 'ALWAYS FAVOUR TRADITION'. YOU CAN MAKE IT MEAN ANYTHING WITHOUT THE PLUMB LEVEL OF INSPIRED SCRIPTURE'

I WILL SHOW YOU THE ERROR OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE AND WHERE IT ORIGINATED!!

I HAVE DESTROYED THIS PREMISE's IN OTHER COMMENTS BUT YOU REFUSE TO ANSWER THEM!!

IF ONE PILLAR OF CATHOLICISM IS DISMANTLED IT ALL FALLS, WHICH IT DOES, BUT YOU WILLING BELIEVE LIES DESPITE IT BEING SHOWN UNCHRISTIAN/UNBIBLICAL.

WHY ARE THEY CALLED ERRORS..BECAUSE YOU CAN REFER BACK TO THE ORIGINAL AS PROOF THEY ARE MISTAKEN IN TRANSLATION.. OR ARE THE ORIGINALS (HEBREW/SEPTUGAINT, KOINE GREEK) NOT THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD..SEE, ALL EXPLAINED BUT I WILL GO FURTHER FOR MY EX BRETHREN OF ROME'S SAKE, MY PROMISE!!

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

1 January 2011 at 19:50  
Blogger Archbishop Cranmer said...

Mr Kingofhighcs,

Whilst you are very welcome to contribute upon His Grace's august blog, he would be deeply appreciative if you would stop shouting.

1 January 2011 at 20:13  
Anonymous len said...

Thank God for the King James Bible,we have the Word of God in beautiful language that the common man can read.
Despite all the opposition the Word went into print in common language.
So we can read the Word, we can know the Truth and the Truth will set us free!
The Bible is a yardstick for defining Truth(perhaps this is why Satan did all in his power to prevent it being published)
The Bible will expose error for when you read the Bible, the Bible reads you!.

"For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart".(Hebrews 14:12)

1 January 2011 at 20:32  
Blogger Lakester91 said...

Kingofhighcs,

I think you'll find that the septuagint books to which you refer so ironically as the 'apocrypha' were not added after the original Bible was put together (by the RCC), but were removed by Luther. If he'd had his way you'd be saying that James and Revelation were added in an evil Catholic conspiracy. Stop the anti-Catholic myths, you only give the secularists an excuse to call Christians mad.

1 January 2011 at 20:41  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Your Grace.

I will alter my Style so it appears that I am not 'shouting' as it is not my intention,,only the limitation of blogging in comments section..no font etc.

My apologies if it appears as such.

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

1 January 2011 at 20:48  
Anonymous Martin sewell said...

Much as we should respect the King James Bible as the forerunner of all later translations, let us beware the famous diction " If the Authorised version was good enough
for Jesus - it's good enough for me."

We need to remember that Christianity spread rapidly and widely for many years, both without any written records and later when a variety of sources become available in differing places, many could not read,

Even today only 10% of the known languages have fully available Bibles. Mission still takes place with maybe a Gospel or two and a variety of the letters etc.

In short celebrate the richness of the King James Bible but
do remember that God ensures the living Gospel ( Good News) permeates the world whether we have " full texts" or not. Relatively few Christians have ever read the entire Bible - yet this does not seem critical to the overall scheme of things.

1 January 2011 at 21:03  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Lakester91 said

Kingofhighcs,

I think you'll find that the septuagint books to which you refer so ironically as the 'apocrypha'( I make no such distiction, show me..) were not added after the original Bible was put together (by the RCC) (Wrong, the original declaration of INSPIRED books was at Nicea, throwing out books that were not deemed 'Inspired' as they are obviously not and can be shown just by reading them, nor did the early church quote them in letters to each other, knowing these were not INSPIRED!!!!), but were removed by Luther. If he'd had his way you'd be saying that James and Revelation were added in an evil Catholic conspiracy (wrongful supposition not based on anything I have said, judge me on my words not what you try to put into my mouth. What have James and Revelation got to do with the Apochrypha?). Stop the anti-Catholic myths (Where have I stated Myths, show me?), you only give the secularists an excuse to call Christians mad.(as if they NEED an excuse..You will not stop me telling the truth from error/lies from Scripture or History)

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

1 January 2011 at 21:05  
Anonymous non mouse said...

What Your Grace, Oswin, and Edward Spalton said.

Also, as I mentioned the other day, methinks that the present big noise about disestablishment is the sound of the euro-establishment - hammering itself into place.

I believe part of that involves re-inscription of the KJV - which is what much of the new translation involves. Translation always is a form of interpretation; but when (as now) the interpretation is ugly and foreign, then we lose the point of having the Bible in our own language: or even of having our own language. Which is what antiChrist wants.

1 January 2011 at 21:20  
Anonymous non mouse said...

btw - the beeb has the ABC's message set as 'not available in your area.' They did the same with the Queen's Christmas message - though I was sufficiently determined to find it elsewhere.

So Britons away from Home - or indeed the rest of the Anglosphere - aren't worthy to receive these messages! At least, according to the euSSR's mouthpiece, which claims to be the biggest broadcasting service in the world.

1 January 2011 at 21:30  
Anonymous not a machine said...

Some time ago a pentecostal church goer told me I should have A king James version , Having read the pre amble of my NIV translation I was fairly convinced my NIV was linguistically translated more up to date .
In the 2 months I have had my KJ version I can only describe it as delight and interesting read. At first the language (I have only known NIV) seems a little difficult , but some how it makes sense and speaks more to the individual and authorities .

However with the KJ comes yet more scholarly enquiry , perhaps the Greek it was transalted from was more understood than now , some bibles carry lineage and times putting the people names and places into a sweeping understanding , of the work . Then there are the historical records of kings and wars .
Who were these people who wrote it all down , how did Greek translators work with Aramaic , there is a whole wonderment at how the Tora was kept and updated , why the greeks bothered and what could have been culturally happening . That is why the bible being so common is often overlooked as being such an extraordinary work .Perhaps it did compete with panthiest fables and stories , how did early christians form without a bible , were the sayings of christ written or passed down for them until the organisation of the Roman empire made it standardised .
I can only say that King James version brings some working to me I had previously missed , and I hope we have some worthwhile shcolar show us somthing in the celebration of its 400 yr history and perhaps further .

1 January 2011 at 21:35  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Jesus was Son of God - why did he not write any texts himself? after all he could turn water into wine - why not a few words onto a page?

1 January 2011 at 21:49  
Anonymous len said...

Lakester 91,
If you and other Catholics are promoting error as Biblical Truth then it is the duty of every Bible believing Christian to redress this!

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"("Timothy 3:16)

To be silent on these matters would be a greater sin than to be considered 'mad'by the secular World.
I would (come to think of it)rather be considered 'mad by the Secular World than let the Gospel be misunderstood.

1 January 2011 at 21:59  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Your Grace forgot to mention how well The BCP fits with the AV Bible and the tightness of the fit.

That the AV was an update of The King's Bible with quite a bit of Martin Luther's translation, and was a riposte by James I to the republican Geneva Bible - which was the one carried on the Mayflower

1 January 2011 at 22:02  
Anonymous len said...

Anon 21:49 Jesus IS the Word, the Word made flesh.
The Old Testament is Christ concealed .The New Testament is Christ revealed.
Jesus is the Living Word of God.The written Word testifies to Jesus Christ.That is why the King James Bible is so very important!.

1 January 2011 at 22:06  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Try asking Him, Anonymous at 21:49, because none of us can answer for Him.

Nevertheless, it seems true to say that, at the time He was on earth, few people could read a written page, so he reached more people by preaching directly to them. His Words being direct from the Author, had Authority.

He also did not rely on media to publish His Word - and He expressly bypassed the control of Scribes and Pharisees; indeed, He by-passed the limitations of Jewish borders.

1 January 2011 at 22:10  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What proportion of CofE Churches still use the KJV?

Those that don't should be ashamed.

1 January 2011 at 22:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you really suppose in your foolishness that Our Lord relies exclusively on multifarious 'translations' of His Word?

People unable to read and write have received Grace. How?

The Holy Spirit is not constrained by the fallible and changeable language of men. What was Babel about?

God in His wisdom used early Hebrew and Aramaic - then Greek and Latin. Ever asked yourself why?

And to those who despise our Arabic brothers, let's remember their role in fracilitating translations from Hebrew, through to Aramaic and then Greek to Latin - during the 'dark' ages of Europe.

Do you suppose God wanted division? Or, could it be that through prayerful communion and conversation people might learn to respect one another's divergent languages and opinions?

When reading the Holy Word each one of us can find what we're looking for and justify our opinion. Can we find what God wants us to hear?

Let's be more civilised and respectful. Aferall, isn't that what what Jesus would want?

2 January 2011 at 02:10  
Blogger Reformation said...

Your Grace:

I am recovering today, 1 Jan 2011, from the serious headache induced by Her Majesty's Christmas message, 25 Dec 2010. I suffered an intense "charlie horse between the ears."

While HM was dignified--as usual--and while the message was spot on--until about 3 minutes 14 seconds into the speech, the large "disconnect" between the history and value of the KJV and "sports as a unifier" was more than this scribe could comfortably digest.

Her handlers and staff writers who wrote the last half of the message did HM and the Church of England an huge disservice, in my not-very-humble-but-quite-correct opinion.

HM was spot on, until that disastrous moment in the message. Again, at about 3 minutes 14 seconds into it.

As indicated, I have nursed the most serious headache and am recovering. I shall continue to remember HM, the Duke of Edinburgh, and the Prince of Wales daily, vis a vis the classic of our communion, the 1662 BCP.

Your Grace, I remain your humble servant by way of prayer,
Donald Philip Veitch

Camp Lejeune, NC
USA

2 January 2011 at 03:47  
Anonymous IanCad said...

Mr. Eman @ 17:30
Peter is not The Rock. Jesus Christ is. In the Old Testament Christ is identified as The Rock many times. Deut. 32:3-4, 1 Sam. 2:2, 2 Sam. 22:23-32, Isaiah 44:8 are just a few. Peter refers to Christ as The Rock three times; Acts 4:11-12, 1 Peter 2:3-6, 1 Peter 2:7-8. Paul states the same four times; 1 Cor. 10:4, 1 Cor. 3:11, Eph. 2:19-20, Romans 9-33. Three times Our Lord declares the same; Luke 20:17-18, Matt. 21:42-44, Mark 12:10-11. Peter's tomb is, allegedly, in St. Peter's. Indeed it is the centre of worship. Peter is dead. He did not rise. As the gates of Hell (the grave) shall not prevail against Christ's Church this presents a problem for Rome. Christ has risen from the grave. His Church prevails.
If Jesus had given Peter Apostolic succession the shameful scene at the Last Supper of the disciples bickering over who should be the greatest would have been moot.
It was not until the year 445 that the then pope Leo 1st. promulgated the fallacy of Petrine Inheritance. This was a time of schism and rivalry among the bishops. Thus, Leo claimed for himself lineage from the Apostle.
We must be wary of the stinking puddles of men's traditions.

2 January 2011 at 04:15  
Blogger ENGLISHMAN said...

So now our arch-traitor mrs winsor claims descent from the stewarts?dotage or mental illness?

2 January 2011 at 07:26  
Blogger Gnostic said...

So if the Authorised Version is the only one available what does an unauthorised version look like? Or is that locked in a vault somewhere and kept secret?

The problem for me, you see, is that the term AV carries more than a whiff of censorship.

2 January 2011 at 10:12  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Never studied the genealogy then, Englishman? That's a long record.

I still stand up for HM - I don't believe the euSSR's henchmen left her much option when they purported to represent the will of the people.

Who knows whether, like so many others, she thinks that if we hang on we'll find a way out of it. In any case, maybe she also considers that the vile parchment cannot possibly be legal - not she, nor they, nor anyone, has the right to give us away. However, the longer we're daft enough to pay into the scam, the less right we have to blame anyone for our spinelessness.

**************
Gnostic - His Grace indicates the time it took to produce the edition we recognise as the KJV.

Its unclear whether you're familiar with the RC translation of roughly the same era and style; if so you probably know that some appreciate its closeness to the Vulgate(St. Jerome, c. 342-420). That's the Douay Rheims (NT 1582 @ Rheims; OT 1609 @Douay; Rev. Challoner 1749-52).

Whenever I do comparisons of various versions though (including Jewish and mod stuff), I end up deriving most enlightenment from the language of KJV.

2 January 2011 at 11:39  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

IanCad
2 January 2011 04:15

Are these Christ's words or not?

"And I say to you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it. "

"And I will give you (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound, even in heaven. And whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed, even in heaven.”

Of course Christ is the Rock - but given the disgreements, then and now, and the need to spred His message and instruct in it, don't you suppose He would appoint leadership?


Christ's word or not?

“I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth."

"And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."


Biblical text or not?

"Then he opened their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures."

“And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles and in the communication of the breaking of bread and in prayers.”

"But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written."

1 January 2011 17:30

Throw historical accusations about if you choose but answer the above.

And 'Gates of Hell' refers to death, yes, but also most certainly to the pit and its agents we have been saved from.

2 January 2011 at 14:46  
Anonymous Oswin said...

anonymous @ 21.49

Who says that he did not???

Jesus was not quite so simplistic as the established Church would have us believe. His was a powerful intellect, and he successfully debated with the wisest of the land. Be sure he did not do so by relating simple parables alone.

It might be said, that Jesus' 'intellectual property rights' have been subverted by others, for their own ends...

2 January 2011 at 16:45  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Englishman @ 07.26

You doubt that she is not of such descent? There are acres of scholarship that suggest otherwise.

2 January 2011 at 16:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

its a shame the bearded druid doesn't actually preach the bible, the gospel of jesus christ. Instead as a whitewashed sepulchre full of dead mens bones he preaches rubbish and draws near to rome whom burned the readers of this bible.

2 January 2011 at 17:01  
Blogger English Viking said...

To anyone who's interested.

The KJV is sublime, in prose, meter and integrity of translation.

The NIV is a nasty attempt to pervert the Word of God and substitute an insipid fake in its place. The Devil rarely changes tack, he persists with the '...did God say?' approach he defeated Eve with. The translators have omitted entire verses they apparently disagree with, without indication. They are terribly inconsistent in translation, using different words in the English for the same word in the original, etc.

Trash such as 'The Message' is not even a Bible, it barely even passes as a book about a god.

Compare the men produced by the study of the KJV with the Hinns, Bonkes, Howard-Browns and Cerrelos, et al, of today, none of which use anything like a reliable translation.

The KJV is one of the reasons this nation was once great. That the decline of its readership is simultaneous with the decline of the nation is not, in my opinion, a coincidence.

BTW. Peter is not the rock. Their is a significant difference between 'petra' and 'petros'.

That anyone believes that a man in an extremely expensive dress, who prays with a head-covering, who lives in his own citadel he has declared his own country (of which he is head), who was a member of the Hitler youth, can apparently be 'God's representative on Earth', whilst continually encouraging millions into idolatry, is evidence of the ease of which the human heart is deflected from seeking the truth toward salving the conscience with futile good-works and stimulating the senses with ritualistic and decorative religion.

2 January 2011 at 20:41  
Anonymous Preacher said...

To see the spirited defence of the Holy Bible (KJV) by you my Bretheren gives me courage, hope & strength. May the Lord Bless you All with a happy & blessed New Year.

Preacher.

2 January 2011 at 22:16  
Blogger KINGOFHIGHCS said...

Preacher said 2 January 2011 22:16

Amen..

There is no greater book in the english language that the King James Bible. The Word of God given by Him to us in our english tongue, OUR heritage and glory, It is and has been a blessing to our nation and all nations that this book has been to taken to and loved by our commonwealth english speaking brethren.
The wonderful words 'stay' in the memory like no other's.

Also Handel's Messiah, the greatest musical masterpiece given to us by God himself as OUR heritage and a wonderful blessing to all who hear it.

What have we EVER done that the Lord should bestow His great blessings on us..
We were once a Nation that loved our God.
How far we have fallen from God's Grace!!

So Says KINGOFHIGHCS

2 January 2011 at 22:31  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

KINGOFHIGHCS

"How far we (UK) have fallen from God's Grace!!"

So we do agree on something ...

The errors in the 1611 KJV maybe illuminating:

- Use of Judas in place of Jesus;
- Use of vinagar instead of vine;
- Promotion of adultery.

3 January 2011 at 01:19  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

English Viking

"That anyone believes that a man in an extremely expensive dress, who prays with a head-covering, who lives in his own citadel he has declared his own country (of which he is head), who was a member of the Hitler youth, can apparently be 'God's representative on Earth', whilst continually encouraging millions into idolatry, is evidence of the ease of which the human heart is deflected from seeking the truth toward salving the conscience with futile good-works and stimulating the senses with ritualistic and decorative religion."

Pray God that as you stand before Christ you can account for this obcene statement.

3 January 2011 at 01:25  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

Anonymous
2 January 2011 17:01

" .. its a shame the bearded druid doesn't actually preach the bible, the gospel of jesus christ. Instead as a whitewashed sepulchre full of dead mens bones he preaches rubbish and draws near to rome whom burned the readers of this bible."

See above response to 'English Viking'

3 January 2011 at 01:34  
Anonymous len said...

Mr Eman ,
A serious question,
Do you really love the truth? If you don't love the truth, God will allow you to believe a lie (2 Thes. 2:10).

How do you react to the truth when some preacher points out that your religion is not in harmony with the revealed will of God? Do you get angry? Or, like the Prodigal Son, do acknowledge that you have sinned against heaven and beg for God's mercy and forgiveness?

How you react to the truth reveals what you are really made of. The gospel is like fire -- it will soften wax and harden clay. What effect will it have on you?

3 January 2011 at 08:53  
Blogger srizals said...

HG said, "The Authorised Version today is not the text which was published in 1611. Hundreds of changes in vocabulary, grammar, spelling and punctuation have been made".

Am I wrong in saying that amendments are part of the earthly introversion that shouldn't have happened in the first place? If it did, one has to wonder since when? Was Nicaea the only decisive one? A meddling affair since ages that shouldn't be taken lightly I suppose? Non mouse, any ideas?

3 January 2011 at 09:15  
Blogger English Viking said...

Mr Eman,

In the words of a very great man, who knew a thing or two about translation, Enoch Powell.

'To see, and not to speak, that is the great betrayal.'

I shall account for my words with a clear conscience, on the grounds that they are true. Anon @ 17:01 will be able to do the same.

Consider this; if Paul died a pauper in a Roman jail, Peter was executed upside down, John died presumably still in exile on Patmos, John Baptist at the hands of a madman after years of self-denial and utter poverty, with the head of them all, The Son of Man 'having not where to lay his head', even though the foxes have holes and the birds have their nests, how come your 'papa' lives in a palace, with his own personal army, in his own personal country? When his time comes, he will not pass to await judgement on cruel wooden cross, or in a prison, or of hunger and thirst. Silk sheets and a funeral that costs more than a small country's national debt will usher that man to his fate.

God is no respecter of persons, least of all those who purport to be His representative when they plainly are not.

3 January 2011 at 12:03  
Blogger srizals said...

Jesus was not an English man! The Bible was not revealed in English! And the origin of Christianity is absolutely not from England or any part of the whole wide West for that matter.

And I thought someone said "OH, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,. Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great Judgment Seat" or intertwined or something like that".

Could the West stop adopting the religion of the East? Maybe Harry Potter indicates something at least genuine to the West? Maybe.

3 January 2011 at 14:48  
Anonymous len said...

Srizels "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

(Galatians 3:28)

3 January 2011 at 16:21  
Anonymous Oswin said...

srizals @ 14.48

Tut tut my lad! As everyone knows, God is indeed an Englishman; therefore, regardless of a wee touch of 'local colour' it is reasonable to suppose that his son be English too. (ok, we'll settle for 'British')

All of which explains why an Englishman/Brit' is never a 'foreigner' wherever he might be found, unlike the residents of that country, who are naturally 'foreign' unless that country be Britain ... simples.

srizalz, old prune, you need to learn how to 'join all the dots' - it's all very simple, once you get the hang of it.

Rather 'over-egging the pudding' somewhat, but it is believed by some, that Mary's grandmother (or great grandmama)hailed from Cornwall, having escaped from an 'arranged marriage' via a mineral-trading ship from Tyre. Thus explaining Jesus' blue-eyes ... the dots you see, you need to join the dots...

3 January 2011 at 17:43  
Anonymous Oswin said...

srizals ... on a more serious note, you say that ''the origin of Christianity is not from England''... are you so sure?

Where was Jesus to be found after the Holy Family escaped to Eygpt, long before he began his ministry?

Did they remain close-by, in Eygpt?

Did the Holy Family live there for many years without comment or remark, so close to Herod, who conducted the 'slaughter of the innocents' out of fear of the new born king? Certainly, it is unlikely. Even more so, it would certainly preclude any early return to Palestine, for anything other than a brief visit.

There is but one Biblical mention of the young Jesus, during the 'passover' incident, in Palestine; and that single mentioning is laden with questions.

Where then, was the young-to-adolescent Jesus?

Proclaimed by prophets, witnessed by the Wise Men, and feared unto mass-murder by Herod, where was Jesus; hiding under some desert rock perhaps? Not a chance!

Yet, we are asked to believe that after all the furore, after the great persecution, all was forgotten, and Jesus lived without comment?

It is here that we come to the folk (?) traditions of Cornwall, Somerset, the Mendips and of Glastonbury.

Traditions that began before the Romans expunged the Druids from Britain ...those same Druids who, like the Jews, predicted, and awaited, the Coming of the Messiah ...those same Druids who were renowned throughout Europe, and the 'known world' as learned teachers ... those same Duids who taught pupils from Rome, Greece and the Near, and Middle East.

Where then was Jesus; where would he be safe? Where would he be educated, learn oratory and debate, sufficient to amaze the learned of Palestine?

Some say, have always said, that the First Church of Christ was here, in Britain. Hell, even the Vatican admits to it! (Although not, surprisingly enough, the modern Church of England, who almost manage deny ANYTHING prior to the Augustine Mission.)

There you go, srizals old mate, a few more dots joined-up. :o)

3 January 2011 at 19:12  
Blogger English Viking said...

Len,

You have either missed entirely the meaning of the verse in Gal. you quote, else you are being naughty.

I suspect the latter.

4 January 2011 at 01:05  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

Oswin3 January
2011 19:12

"Some say, have always said, that the First Church of Christ was here, in Britain. Hell, even the Vatican admits to it! (Although not, surprisingly enough, the modern Church of England, who almost manage deny ANYTHING prior to the Augustine Mission.)"


Careful ... early life of Jesus is not in the sola Scripture!

The Bible is also pretty clear that Jesus' message and mission was first for the Jewish people.

Seriously, I've visited Glastonbury Abbey and it is a very special place. What are the references regarding Rome's views about Jesus and Cornwall?

4 January 2011 at 03:20  
Blogger srizals said...

Oswin, the druids were also waiting for the Messiah? I never knew about it. But can only guess since it is a universal thing actually. Everyone was waiting for their saviour from tyranny and ignorance, of others and especially of themselves. But, could you give me any links in the Internet that I can read about the druids and their prophecy? Thanks.

4 January 2011 at 13:23  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Mr.Eman @ 03.20

You are correct in your assertion that Jesus' message was first, for the Jewish peoples; at least, I think you are, as I'm no Biblical scholar; but I have a great interest in what might be termed the 'periphery' (fore and aft)of the Christian religion.

However, Jesus had to be 'somewhere' during his childhood, adolescence and as a young man.

In determining 'where' - we must first look to what sources exist, regardless of how tenuous they may appear.

You are doubtless aware of the association, supposed or otherwise, of Joseph of Arimathea, with Glastonbury; then add to which, the folk traditions that suggest Jesus lived in Cornwall, was associated with the mining of tin, and was 'known' throughout the 'mineral-bearing' counties of the South West...re' the old song/hymn, that ''Jesus was a miner'' and, Baring Gould's ''Book of Cornwall'' that sites several folk-tales of Jesus learning to extract tin, and purging it from wolfram etc.

Coincidentally (?) Joseph of Arimathea was 'Noblis Decurio' or Minister for Mines, for the Roman Government in Palestine, as well as being a respected member of the Sanhedrin.

Other sources have him as a mineral dealer, holding mining concessions in Britain.

Much of this 'other life' of Jesus relies on a recognition of the true nature of Britain prior to the Roman Conquest. Britain was very much MORE than is suggested by Julius Caesar's negative summation; as is testified, by earlier Roman sources.

Anyhows, it is an enormous subject area, but an immensely fascinating one; one that has for centuries run concurrent with the more orthodox, but inaccurate, view of British history.

4 January 2011 at 18:13  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr eman, stop being religious. religion wont save you.

4 January 2011 at 19:09  
Anonymous Oswin said...

srizals @13.23

As you say, it is indeed a ''unversal thing'' - however, there are indicators that suggest the Druidic concept of the 'Messiah' were one and the same ... possibly, because there is thought to be an earlier link/association between the Druids, and the Iraelites/Hebrews... being brought to Britain by Hu Gadarn, or 'The Mighty' its first colonizer, a contemporary of the Patriarch Abraham, and under Gadarn's successors: Plennydd, Goron, Alawn, and Rhivon; where Druidism then assumed it's complete organisation, becoming BOTH the ecclesiastical and civil constitution of the Island of Brtian, circa 3900 years before Christ.

However, I don't have a convenient link to offer, as most of my studies/research predate the internet.

More recent books on the subject, still tend to pivot upon the bastardised form of Druidism, post Roman conquest/post persecution, when the Druids were reduced to performing 'human sacrifice' whilst living in holes in the ground, until rooted-out by the Romans, for execution.

Or else, 'druidism' is now seemingly reduced to a bunch of new-new-age 'touchy-feely' tree-huggers cavorting around Stonehenge in bed-sheets.

Either way, neither bears any relationship to the original.

However, if you are genuinely interested (and I see no reason why the Druids should be any less pertinent to muslims, than to Christians)then I urge you to begin your research with the 'Laws of Molmutius' (450B.C.) Which stated: ''There are three tests of civil liberty; equality of rights; equality of taxation; and the freedom to come and go''...or, if you can find them: R.W. Morgan's in-depth studies of Druidism.

Failing the above, Victor Dunstan gives an interesting, short overview in his book ''Did the Virgin Mary Live and Dire in England?''

I'm sorry I cannot offer anything more specific/less piece-meal, but I'm happy to attempt any further questions.

4 January 2011 at 19:59  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Mr. Eman @ 03.20


My apologies, I over-looked your question re' ''Rome's view about Jesus'' (Rome's view of the origins of the English Church)

I cannot recall the exact reference, but one of the occasions when the subject emerged, was during the period when 'Rome' was attempting to persaude King Henry VIII to stay within the Roman Catholic Church ... Henry had been banging-on about the 'ancient rights' of the Church in Britain, and in answer, the Pope acknowledged/ recognised that Christianity had come to Britain BEFORE it became established in Rome, as the Roman Church.

It is often thought that St. Paul was responsible for taking Christianity to Rome, but that is not so. The church in Rome existed before St. Paul went to Rome, and the evidence is that it spread to Rome NOT from Palestine, but from Britain. In fact, at the time that Christianity first took root in Britain, the Apostle Paul (then Saul of Tarsus) was yet 'breathing fire' against Christians, as he was yet to encounter the glorified Christ, on the road to Damascus.

The Pope acknowledged that Christianity was first introduced to Britain by Joseph of Arimathea, followed by Simon Zelotes, the apostle; then by Aistobulus, the first bishop of the Britains; then by St.Paul. It's first converts were members of the royal family of Siluria: Gladdys, the siuster of Caradog. Gladys (Claudia) and Eurgen, his daughters, and Linus, his son, converted in Britain before they were taken into captivity in Rome.

I originally said that the ''First Church of Christ was supposed to have been founded in Britain'' which is NOT the same as saying the first 'Christian' Church...

4 January 2011 at 20:32  
Anonymous Oswin said...

My own post @ 19.59

Should read: Victor Dunstan's book: ''Did the Virgin Mary Live and DIE in Britain''- and NOT 'dire' as I unfortunately typed!

Please forgive other typo's too. :o{

4 January 2011 at 20:42  
Blogger English Viking said...

Oswin,

Have you ever read The Bible?

Y'know, the book of Romans, by Paul?

Obviously not.

5 January 2011 at 01:52  
Anonymous Oswin said...

English Viking, instead of mere rudeness, why not state your point clearly, and we'll proceed from there, eh?

5 January 2011 at 03:19  
Blogger Mr Eman said...

English Viking said...
5 January 2011 01:52

"Oswin,

Have you ever read The Bible?

Y'know, the book of Romans, by Paul?

Obviously not."

See - we do agree on some things!

I was delivered by a stork to my parents; or was I left under a goosebury bush?

6 January 2011 at 23:43  
Blogger srizals said...

Mr. Eman said, "I was delivered by a stork to my parents.."
And for that, I couldn't have ignored Lambert, the sheepish lion. Remember what made the sheepish lion, who thinks that he was a sheep, became a raging lion?

Is it not the tyranny of the wolf? Funny how tyranny has the same effect on us all. Even for a cartoon character.

7 January 2011 at 02:03  
Anonymous Oswin said...

Mr. Eman @ 23:43

First you ask me to relate what the Pope relayed to Henry VIII, and then you mock my reply!

I really must apologise to you, on behalf of Pope Clement VII; be sure he'll get the edge of my tongue the very next time I see him.

I hope that you, and that other arch-boor, get to hold hands soon!

7 January 2011 at 03:03  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older