This book critically examines the claims of Oneness theology in light of biblical exegesis. Specifically, it affirms the biblical presentation of God existing as three distinct coequal, coeternal, and coexistent Persons or Selves.
Edward Goodrick's classic guide introduces the alphabets and basic elements of Greek and Hebrew grammar. With this foundation, the student is encouraged to use some basic language tools, including analytical, lexicons, interlinears, concordances, and commentaries.
Evangelical Christians vigorously defend the Bible as the inspired Word of God, yet we limit that term just to the autographs--those original writings of the Scriptures that no longer exist. What does this say for the reliability of your Bible? Can you honestly and truthfully claim that your Bible translation is the inspired Word of God? Ed Goodrick believes that we need to adjust our thinking about inspiration: a change that argues that the Bible that you actually hold in your hand is also rightly described as the inspired Word of God. His enlightening discussion of the nature of God's revelation, the accurate copying of these original writings, the careful comparison of the manuscripts (textual criticism), and their translation into contemporary languages will give you a renewed confidence in the trustworthiness of your Bible. Goodrick also explores the issues that surround interpreting the Bible, for if it is misused by present-day readers, it does little good practically to assert its divine origin. Ray Lubeck has sought to bring this very important work back into print for a new generation of believers who now need, more than ever in this increasingly postmodern culture, to learn that the Bible is worthy of your trust, commitment, study, and confidence. Though Goodrick's arguments are timeless, his wording and sources have now been completely updated, giving the second edition of Is My Bible the Inspired Word of God? an easy-to-read style for today.
Reprint of the original, first published in 1871. The publishing house Anatiposi publishes historical books as reprints. Due to their age, these books may have missing pages or inferior quality. Our aim is to preserve these books and make them available to the public so that they do not get lost.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
The Americanization of Edward Bok; The Autobiography of a Dutch Boy Fifty Years After, is many of the old books which have been considered important throughout the human history. They are now extremely scarce and very expensive antique. So that this work is never forgotten we republish these books in high quality, using the original text and artwork so that they can be preserved for the present and future generations. This whole book has been reformatted, retyped and designed. These books are not made of scanned copies of their original work and hence the text is clear and readable.
This book was to have been written in 1914, when I foresaw some leisure to write it, for I then intended to retire from active editorship. But the war came, an entirely new set of duties commanded, and the project was laid aside. Its title and the form, however, were then chosen. By the form I refer particularly to the use of the third person. I had always felt the most effective method of writing an autobiography, for the sake of a better perspective, was mentally to separate the writer from his subject by this device. Moreover, this method came to me very naturally in dealing with the Edward Bok, editor and publicist, whom I have tried to describe in this book, because, in many respects, he has had and has been a personality apart from my private self. I have again and again found myself watching with intense amusement and interest the Edward Bok of this book at work. I have, in turn, applauded him and criticised him, as I do in this book. Not that I ever considered myself bigger or broader than this Edward Bok: simply that he was different. His tastes, his outlook, his manner of looking at things were totally at variance with my own. In fact, my chief difficulty during Edward Bok's directorship of The Ladies' Home Journal was to abstain from breaking through the editor and revealing my real self. Several times I did so, and each time I saw how different was the effect from that when the editorial Edward Bok had been allowed sway. Little by little I learned to subordinate myself and to let him have full rein. But no relief of my life was so great to me personally as his decision to retire from his editorship. My family and friends were surprised and amused by my intense and obvious relief when he did so. Only to those closest to me could I explain the reason for the sense of absolute freedom and gratitude that I felt. Since that time my feelings have been an interesting study to myself. There are no longer two personalities. The Edward Bok of whom I have written has passed out of my being as completely as if he had never been there, save for the records and files on my library shelves. It is easy, therefore, for me to write of him as a personality apart: in fact, I could not depict him from any other point of view. To write of him in the first person, as if he were myself, is impossible, for he is not.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.