<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>RealApologetics Blog &#187; Canon and Criticism</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/category/canon-and-criticism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog</link>
	<description>Serious. Active. God-honoring Christianity.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:15:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Cutting Edge of Liberalism Deals with the Book of Revelation: A Brief Response to Elaine Pagels</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/11/10/the-cutting-edge-of-liberalism-deals-with-the-book-of-revelation-a-brief-response-to-elaine-pagels/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/11/10/the-cutting-edge-of-liberalism-deals-with-the-book-of-revelation-a-brief-response-to-elaine-pagels/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 23:03:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canon and Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canonical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[edge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gnostic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pagels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revelation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=4026</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The latest edition of Edge featured an essay by Elaine Pagels entitled &#8220;The Book of Revelation: Prophecy and Politics.&#8221; As most of you know, Edge is more or less a think-tank of secularists, evolutionary psychologists, scientists, etc. (e.g. Sam Harris) who are continually puzzled by why religion still exists. Why hasn&#8217;t evolution gotten rid of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/11/10/the-cutting-edge-of-liberalism-deals-with-the-book-of-revelation-a-brief-response-to-elaine-pagels/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>KJVOnlysim in HyperDispensationalism: A Brief Refutation</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/09/14/kjvonlysim-in-hyperdispensationalism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/09/14/kjvonlysim-in-hyperdispensationalism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 01:03:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[King James Onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bible]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hovind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[king james]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kurth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[version]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=3860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When asked why we recommend the KJV, people are surprised to learn that the King James Version and the New King James Version are the only English translations based on the correct Greek text of the New Testament, the Textus Receptus, or Received Text. All other English versions follow a corrupt Greek text that was [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/09/14/kjvonlysim-in-hyperdispensationalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Translation Triangle: A Suggested Model of Use</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/04/04/translation-triangle-a-suggested-model-of-use/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/04/04/translation-triangle-a-suggested-model-of-use/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 19:02:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canon and Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RealApologetics Recommended]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[esv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[james white]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kjv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[model]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nasb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[net]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[niv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nlt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nrsv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reformed baptist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rendering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[translations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=3251</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Lord has graciously opened up various ministry opportunities over the past several weeks. And after finishing teaching through chapter 1 (Scripture) of the LBCF at church, doing a week long blog exchange with a Textus Receptus Onlyist (Dr. Jeff Riddle), and after speaking at Intervarsity Christian Fellowship for SDSMT last Thursday night on the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/04/04/translation-triangle-a-suggested-model-of-use/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Canon and Criticism: TR Onlyism and the Canon of Scripture? &#8211; Part I</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/canon-and-criticism-tr-onlyism-and-the-canon-of-scripture-part-i/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/canon-and-criticism-tr-onlyism-and-the-canon-of-scripture-part-i/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:32:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canon and Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hubner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[priority byzantine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[riddle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tr]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=3242</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pastor Jeff Riddle (jeffriddle.net) has made a few interesting assertions (one&#8217;s I have honestly never heard of before) that needs some immediate attention: Commitment to the traditional text results in a stable, fixed, and reliable text (a closed canon). Commitment to the ongoing editions of the modern critical text results in an unstable, ever-changing text [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/canon-and-criticism-tr-onlyism-and-the-canon-of-scripture-part-i/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case Studies in King James Onlyism: Misc. and General Closure to Riddle Exchange</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-misc-and-general-closure-to-riddle-exchange/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-misc-and-general-closure-to-riddle-exchange/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:28:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[King James Onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[critical]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ehrman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kjv]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[riddle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wallace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=3238</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dr. Riddle&#8217;s answering to the 10+ list of questions I asked him yesterday (here...nevermind, it&#8217;s past midnight now, so, two days ago) reveals very much of what I think should be made clear and available to the public; the discussion has reached its more fruitful point and so I don&#8217;t plan on interacting much more  [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-misc-and-general-closure-to-riddle-exchange/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case Studies in King James Onlyism: The Woman Caught in Adultery was in the Original?</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-the-woman-caught-in-adultery-was-in-the-original/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-the-woman-caught-in-adultery-was-in-the-original/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 07:02:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[King James Onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adultera]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adulterae]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[king james]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pericope]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[variant]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=3210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Picking up from the last segment (here or here, depending on what you consider &#8220;last&#8221;), Riddle goes on in his 4th rejoinder: Second, Hubner assumes that no reasonable person could possibly believe that the pericopae adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) is part of the text of Scripture. He asks, “And, is Riddle really suggesting the pericope in [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/31/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-the-woman-caught-in-adultery-was-in-the-original/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case Studies in King James Onlyism: Predictable Answers to Riddle&#8217;s Questions</title>
		<link>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/30/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-predictable-answers-to-riddles-questions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/30/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-predictable-answers-to-riddles-questions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 04:45:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jaminhubner</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[King James Onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[king james]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[onlyism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[riddle]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/?p=3226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Pastor Riddle posted a few straight denials and some concise questions regarding our exchanges. He says: 1. Hubner incorrectly identifies me and Alan J. Macgregor as KJV-Only-ists. This is an odd charge. I said in the very first post that &#8220;Clearly, Macgregor falls somewhere in categories 1 and 2 of King James Only Advocates (see [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.realapologetics.org/blog/2011/03/30/case-studies-in-king-james-onlyism-predictable-answers-to-riddles-questions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

