If and Even If – Some Random Arguments

    Here I am, just cleaning out the mental junk drawer. 

    If, as the King James Only crowd will argue, the words of God are pure and uncorrupted, pure words, as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times and God has kept them, preserved them from this generation forever (Psalm 12: 6-7), then why was the King James translation necessary? Shouldn’t the Tyndale translation, which preceded the KJV, have been sufficient? Or if the Tyndale was corrupted, shouldn’t the Latin Vulgate translation have been preserved uncorrupted? Or again, why did the Jews in Alexandria in the 3^rd and 2^nd centuries BCE feel the need translate the scriptures into Greek? Shouldn’t the Hebrew originals have been preserved uncorrupted?

    And never mind the fact that the KJV translators themselves rejected the idea that their work was perfect. They explicitly denied it in 1611 in their preface to the completed work.

    Even if we were to accept the historicity of Noah’s ark and the worldwide flood (and that’s a big if…), God’s promise to never again flood the earth (Genesis 9:11) cannot be used as an argument against global warming. God may have promised not to flood the world, but that is not the same as a guarantee of protection from our own climate-changing acts of self-destruction. God’s covenant of mercy does not absolve us of our ecological stewardship.