Tim Challies, John MacArthur, and Smoking

If you've followed this blog, you have no taste and you're aware that I recently couldn't get a decent answer out of Tim Challies. Tim used to be on my blogroll at Zits. I recommended him because he has some interesting stuff and it seemed to be completely orthodox. However, he recently plugged the TNIV in audio form.

When I asked how he could do such a thing as push an altered Bible version in light of scriptural injunctions to never do such a thing. He simply got angry and refused to deal with this scriptural issue.

SOOOOO....just today I noticed that his blog is plugged on one of John MacArthur's blogs, Pulpit Magazine in an article by Nathan Williams. Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. Here's my chance to get to the bottom of this--to light a fire under the right folks, perhaps.

I sent this comment to Nathan Williams:

-------------------------------------------------------

Nathan Williams,
Speaking of Challies, it was sad to see him recently plug a gendered-altered translation of the Bible called the TNIV in audio form. I asked him if he would please explain why it’s okay to put forward an altered version of the Scripture in light of all the scriptural injunctions that make it clear we are liars when we do such things.

His only response was a complete refusal to deal with passages like Prov. 30:5-6, Deut. 4:2 and others…and to get mad at me for insisting on an answer.

Most everything Tim does is absolutely orthodox and good. Why is this particular sort of thing tolerated?

What is the stance of John MacArthur on altered Bible versions? I have contacted Phil Johnson some time ago on this issue and Challies without response. Is his friendship with Challies above Scripture? Perhaps he has not had time to answer. I simply want to know where you guys stand.

Personally, I can’t believe MacArthur would put up with this sort of compromise.

What gives,
Phil Perkins.

-------------------------------------------------------

Smokin' out the rabbits,
Phil Perkins.