2 thoughts on “Dr. Riddle’s Rejoinder to Matthew Everhard on the Why I Preach Appendix

  1. To be honest, the scenario Everhard says he experienced is hard to believe. Is it entirely fictitious, or massively exaggerated and skewed? Either way, doesn’t put him in a very good position. I’d call it slander against Riddle and the contributors to his book. I’ve read to book and enjoyed it. Most of the uproar seems to be due to the article by Myers in which he referred to modern versions as Satan’s bibles. Actually, I think that’s a fair characterization. What about you?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I do agree insofar as modern versions contain words that are not God’s words or omit words that are. A Bible which contains the words of God and the words of men or omits the words of God cannot be properly called the word of God. And if that Bible cannot properly be called God’s word then it can only be called the word of the World, the Flesh, or the Devil. Unless of course, that Bible is not called a Bible but rather a tract or a commentary. In such cases, fine, but it cannot properly be called the Bible.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: