Archive for the ‘Bible’ Category

The NET Bible Is a Very Unique Study Bible

Posted: September 22, 2012 in Bible
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
0

NET Bible is a very unique study Bible. Most of the notes are textual critical notes. Textual criticism help us determine the original wording in the 5000 existing manuscripts of the NT. Because no two manuscripts are the same, textual criticism identifies what the original authors wrote. There are a lot of notes: 60,237 of them. It is called NET Bible because it can be downloaded. It was written so translators could download the NET Bible with its textual critical notes to aid them in translating the Bible into the native language. You can get a free NET Bible at www.netbible.com. If you are into the Hebrew and Greek this Bible will help you exegeting a passage. Even if you are not into the original languages you can still benefit from the interpretive notes. There are both translation notes and study notes.

Here are the notes from 2 Sam 24:1. The sn stands for study notes and the tn stands for translation notes in the NET. “sn The parallel text in 1 Chr 21:1 says, ‘An adversary opposed Israel, inciting David to count how many warriors Israel had.’ The Samuel version gives an underlying theological perspective, while the Chronicler simply describes what happened from a human perspective. The adversary in 1 Chr 21:1 is likely a human enemy, probably a nearby nation whose hostility against Israel pressured David into numbering the people so he could assess his military strength”( page 550).

Here are the notes from 1 Chr 21:1 “An adversary opposed Israel inciting David to count how many warriors Israel had.” Here are the notes based on this verse: “tn Heb ‘and incited David to count Israel.’ As v. 5 indicates, David was not interested in a general census, but in determining how much military strength he had. sn The parallel text in 2 Sam 24:1 says, ‘The LORD’s anger again raged against Israel and he incited David against them, saying: ‘Go, count Israel and Judah!’ The version of the incident in the book of 2 Samuel gives an underlying theological perspective, while the Chronicler simply describes what happened from a human perspective. You can read Constable’s very helpful notes on 2 Sam 24:1.

Bible.org also has the NET Bible along with Thomas Constable’s commentary on every book in the Bible. When I am preparing for a sermon I like to read and reread the text as many times as possible. In one of those readings, I like to read NET Bible notes. The first commentary I read is Bible Knowledge Commentary in order to get the big picture of the text and then I usually read Constable’s commentary for a similar reason. Then I start with the exegetical commentaries. The last commentaries I read are the sermonic commentaries like Wiersbe and MacArthur. This is Donald Sunukjian’s suggested procedure for using commentaries.

John Piper Quoting Romans Eight

Posted: August 31, 2012 in Bible
Tags:
0

 

I am preaching through Romans 8 and it was good just to listen this profound chapter quoted from memory by John Piper. One Bible teacher said, that if all of Scripture was a ring, then the book of Romans was the diamond and Romans 8 was the sparkle on the diamond.

Is There is a Difference between Infallibility and Inerrancy as Rogers and McKim Believe?

Posted: April 19, 2012 in Bible
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

This view of infallibility and inerrancy being the same is challenged today. Some would say that the Bible is infallible in areas of “Faith and Practice” or that the Bible is without error when it teaches us how to be saved and how to live the Christian life. The reason the Bible is infallible in these two areas, they say, is because this is the reason the Bible was written. But in areas of history and science the Bible is not inerrant. This is the view of Jack B. Rogers and Donald McKim in The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible.

A Definition of Inerrancy

Wayne Grudem gives a very good definition of inerrancy (the doctrine that there were no errors in the original writning of Scripture): “The inerrancy of Scripture means that Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact” (Systematic Theology, page 90). Ryrie adds to this definition: “The Bible tells the truth. Truth can and does include approximations, free quotations, language of appearances, and different accounts of the same event as long as these do not contradict” (Basic Theology, page 82).

Importance of Inerrancy

The Domino Effect took place at Fuller Theological Seminary which was founded in 1947 by Charles Fuller when inerrancy was abandoned.

Their first doctrinal statement read:

“The books which form the canon of the Old and New Testaments as originally given are plenarily inspired and free from all error in the whole and in the part. These books constitute the written Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” I think you agree with me, that this is a Biblical statement.

Every faculty member was to sign without mental reservation or voluntarily leave. In 1962, one board member denied inerrancy and nothing was done. Later two faculty members denied inerrancy and nothing was done. The first dimino fell.

In 1972, Fuller adopted a new doctrinal statement:

“Scripture is an essential part and trustworthy record of this divine disclosure. All the books of the Old and New Testaments, given by divine inspiration, are the written Word of God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” One all important statement is omitted from the first statement: “free from all error in the whole and in the part.” Thus you have denial of inerrancy.

Five years later (1977) Fuller’s professor Paul King Jewett in his Man as Male and Female said Paul’s teaching about the subordination of woman to male leadership in Ephesians 5 is an error and in contradiction to Galatians 3:28. In other words, now at Fuller, according to Jewett’s view, the Scripture is infallible only in the area of faith or salvation.

Look at the downward spiral which took place at Fuller.

1. Fuller went from believing the infallibility of all Scripture (in their first doctrinal statement).

2. Fuller then move to believing the infallibility of the Scripture only in faith and practice but no longer in inerrancy of Scripture at this point (seen in second doctrinal statement).

3. Finally, Fuller move to believing the infallibility of Scripture only in the area of salvation (Jewett’s view) or the Scripture is only inerrant when speaks of salvation.

Neo-Orthodoxy made it’s influence on Fuller Seminary through Daniel Fuller who went to Bazil, Switzerland, to study under Neo-Orthodox theologian Karl Barth (1886-1968), who did not believe in inerrancy. Barth wrote about his view of errancy in his Church Dogmatics: “The Bible witnesses to a revelation from God …..The prophets and apostles are actually guilty of error in their spoken and written word” (pages 507, 528, 529).

“The illustration that the Neo-Orthodox usually gives is that the Bible is like a minister preaching the Gospel. Although there may be many mistakes in his sermon, he is still witnessing to the truth, and this is sufficient to secure salvation for men” (Steward Custer, Does Inspiration Demand Inerrancy, p. 75.).

In 1978, the International Council of Biblical Inerrancy met at the Hyatt Regency O’Hare in Chicago consisting of 300 noted scholars, to combat this heresy and produced The Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. Article XI reads, “We affirm that Scripture, having been given by divine inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true and reliable in all the matters it addresses. We deny that it is possible for the Bible to be at the same time infallible and errant in its assertions. Infallibility and inerrancy may be distinguished, but not separated.”

What is the Scriptural teaching on inerrancy?

1. God can not lie (Heb. 6:18)

2. God breathed out (inspired) the Bible (2nd Tim. 3:16)

3. Therefore the Bible is true. “Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him” (Prov. 30:5).

What is our response to this reasoning that does not see the infallibility and inerrancy as the same?

The Bible declares that “all Scripture is inspired.” The term “Scripture” includes the O.T. (Lk. 24:44), the gospels (Lk. 4:21) and the N.T. epistles (2nd Pet. 3:16). The New Testament authors trusted the smallest historical details from the Old Testament.

Hebrew 11:3 makes a scientific statement that must be accepted by faith. “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”

On page 94 of Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology is a long list of O.T. historical events referred to in the New Testament as true.

As far as the writers of Scripture were concerned, infallibility and inerrancy are equal.

Back to the Basics Series: How We Got Our Bible, Part 2

Posted: November 19, 2010 in Bible, Sermons
Tags: , ,
0

William Tyndale was born 100 years after John Wycliffe’s death and had the advantage of the most important invention since the wheel, the invention of the printing press. Tyndale was both a scholar and reformer. Tyndale once remarked to a critic, “If God spares my life, ere many years, I will cause the boy that drives the plough in England to know more of the Scriptures than you do.”

Because of England’s prohibition of English translations, Tyndale had to leave his homeland in 1524 and never see it again. That would be comparable for you or me leaving the USA in order to help spread God’s Word. In Germany, Tyndale, printed and published in 1525 the first complete NT in English from the Greek. Within a year, friends were smuggling the small copies into England in bales of cloth, in sacks of flour, and in other imported goods and thus into the hands and hearts of the people.

Tyndale was viciously betrayed by a friend who turned Tyndale over to the authorities. Tyndale was imprisoned in 1536 in a dungeon near Brussels. Tyndale wrote this despondent letter,

I suffer extremely from the cold in the head being afflicted with a perpetual cough. My overcoat has been worn out. My shirts also are worn out. I also wish my jailor’s permission to have a candle in the evening for it is wearisome to sit alone in the dark. But above all things, I entreat and beseech your clemency to be urgent with the Procureur, that he may kindly suffer me to have my Hebrew Bible, Grammar, and Dictionary that I may spend my time with that study.”

The RCC found Tyndale guilty of heresy and handed him over to the secular government for execution. On October 6th, 1536 governmental authorities led him to the stake and strangled and burned him in the prison yard. In a loud voice, his dying words rang out, “Lord, open the king of England’s eyes.”

God answered Tyndale’s prayer. The next English Version had a picture in the front, showing King Henry VIII approving of and giving out the English Bible, The Great Bible of 1539. Even before Tyndale’s death, German printers had published the Coverdale Bible translated into English based largely on Tyndale’s Bible.

Various publishers disseminated approximately 50,000 copies of Tyndale’s own Bible before his death. Tyndale’s translation forms the basis of the KJV in phasing, vocabulary, and musical rhythm and constitutes 4/5’s of the KJV.

God wants His Word in the common language of the people so we can read and interpret God’s Word. That is why the New KJV and other accurate, modern translations like the ESV are necessary today.

Step Six: Interpretation

When Philip heard the Ethiopian bachlor reading the Book of Isaiah, he asked him, “Do you understand what you are reading?” He answered, “How can I except some man should guide (Acts 8:31)?” The doctrine of perspicuity or clarity of Scripture is the Biblical truth that God’s people can understand the Bible. But very often, a “man” or teacher is necessary to help “guide” others to learn. We are blessed with a skillful team of Sunday School teachers who would guide you to better understanding God’s Word. My primary ministry as Pastor/Teacher (Ephesians 4:11) is to help you in this area.

Here are some basic principles of interpretation that will help you in your reading and interpreting God’s Word.

1. Each text must be interpreted literally (in the normal sense of language grammar).

A. When God speaks, He makes sense (Job 38).

B. This is how the Bible interprets itself (Micah 5:2 in Matthew 2:6).

2. Each text must be interpreted according the historical setting.

A. What the text meant to the original audience must first be found out, before what does it mean to me.

B. This is the historical-grammatical method of interpretation.

C. Is Matthew 10:5-6 for me?

3. Each text must be interpreted in its cultural setting. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul is dealing with a church crisis in a first century culture. Today the issue is not women wearing a head covering but an unwillingness to follow male leadership in the church.

4. Each text must be interpreted in its context. What does it mean to “endure unto the end” in Matthew 24:13. The context is the seven year Tribulation Period not today.

5. Each text must be interpreted according to its literary characteristics.

A. There is General Hermeneutics: Principles of interpretation for all Scripture which we have just considered.

B. There is Special Hermeneutics: Principles of interpretation for specific kinds or genres of Scripture. For example, narratives are different from Hebrew poetry. Narratives have plots or story lines and Hebrew poetry has tight parallelism.

6. Each text must be interpreted according to the principle of non-contradiction. Obscure passages are interpreted by clear passages. Acts 2:38 does not teach salvation by works i.e., water baptism, because many other passages clearing teach salvation by grace and not works (Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5; Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28).

Step Seven: Application

After we answer the questions, “What does the passage say?” from our reading and rereading of Scripture and the question, “What does the passage mean?” from the principles of interpretation we have been taught and seen applied, then we are ready to answer the question, “How can this passage change my life?”

Step Eight: Communication

Now, I am ready to share with others what God has taught me and used to changed in my life. This was Ezra’s method of Bible study as recorded in Ezra 7:10: “For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek (study) the law of the LORD, and to do it (apply), and to teach (communicate) in Israel statutes and judgments.

Back to the Basics Series: How We Got Our English Bible, Part 1

Posted: November 9, 2010 in Bible, Sermons
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

To grow as a Christian the Word of God must be paramount in our lives. How can we be certain that this book we call the Bible is the Word of God? How did God get His Word from His mind onto the pages of the Bible we hold in our lap? James B. Williams has a book entitled, “From the Mind of God to Mind of Man.” How does God get His Word from His mind into your mine? Here are the steps God took.

Step One: Revelation

When God speaks, He does not mumble. God has revealed Himself in two ways. God revealed Himself generally and specially.

A. God has revealed Himself generally through nature or creation as seen in Psalm 19:1-6. “The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament shows His handiwork.” Spurgeon said, “Creation is an outstretched hand pointing to God.” Nature is a giant billboard declaring, “There is a God.” General revelation, however, is sufficient to condemn the sinner but not sufficient to save. Paul declared this limitation in Romans 1:20.

B. God has revealed Himself specially in Scripture which David stated in Psalm 19:7-14. “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.” To the sinner who responds to the limited message of nature God will get him the saving gospel as He sent Peter to Cornelius in Caesarea (Acts 10).

Step Two: Inspiration

A. Revelation is truth that God has communicated to man.

B. Inspiration is the means God used to write down revelation.

1. The origin of Scripture is recorded in 2 Timothy 3:16. Puritan Thomas Watson said, “The Old and New Testaments are the two lips of God by which He has spoken to us.” Scripture did not originate with man. The Bible is the Word of God.

2. The method of inspiration is recorded in 2 Peter 1:21.

a. There is a human instrumentality in the method. Peter says, “holy men of God spoke” or wrote is Peter’s idea that he makes clear in 3:16. Scripture did not originate with man but God used man in the recording of inspired Scripture.

b. There is the divine instrumentality also. This is called Dual Authorship. Peter continues his thought that “holy men of God spoke or wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” When the Holy Spirit superintended the writing of Scripture, the Holy Spirit suspended the ability of the writers to make mistakes. Therefore what they wrote was without error. This is the doctrine of Inerrancy.

Step Three: Canonicity

A. The canon of Scripture is the list of 66 inspired books that belong in the Bible.

B. The study of the canon of Scripture answers these questions, “Why are there only 66 books in the Bible?” “Who decided on these 66 books?” “What about Paul’s lost letter in 1 Corinthians 5:9?”

There are two answers. One is incorrect and the other is correct.

1. The Correct Answer: God decided which books would be in the Canon when He inspired the 66 books which were later recognized by godly believers.

2. The Incorrect Answer: The Roman Catholic Church decided and therefore included 14 other books called the Apocrypha. It was not until 1546 at the Council of Trent that the RCC declared the Apocrypha part of the canon or list of books that belonged in the Bible. These books are rejected because they contradict the message of the 66 inspired books. For example, apocryphal Judith and Tobit teach salvation by works. There are 250 New Testament quotes of Old Testament books in the New Testament and none from the Apocrypha.

Step Four: Textual Criticism

We do not possess the original writings of the apostles and prophets. We carry around a copy of a copy of a copy, etc. So how can we be confident that through the copying process, God has preserved His Word? For example, there are 5000 existing New Testament manuscripts in part or whole of the New Testament which is miracle in itself. There are only 9-10 copies of Caesar’s Gallic Wars.

“Modern scholars believe they have a fairly exact rendering of Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet,’ since a handful of copies of the play made within 200 years of its original writing exist. But the New Testament is without question the most documented book in history” (Adrian Rogers. Back to the Basics, Vol 1 page 20). We posssess a papyrus fragment of John 18 that dates back to A.D. 125 or within less than 50 years when John wrote his Gospel.

Of the 5000 copies of the New Testament, however, no two are the same. The textual critic helps us determine the exact wording of the Bible by examining the existing manuscripts. There are three well know textual critics: Jerome, Erasmus, and the KJV translators.

Desiderius Erasmus, a Dutch Roman Catholic scholar, is the most well know textual critic. Erasmus produced the first published Greek New Testament in 1516. Erasmus was severly criticized for trying to improve on Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. Erasmus’ fourth edition became the basis for the Textus Receptus which in turn became the basis for the KJV. Erasmus compared 4 or 5 manuscripts to produce the KJV.

The textual critic guarantees that the Word of God in the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek have been preserved. Most believers today do not read and speak in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek which makes the next step necessary.

Step Five: Translation

God wants His Word in the common language of the people and He accomplishes this purpose through translations.

1. When the Greek language under the influence of Alexander the Great replaced Hebrew and Aramaic, God in His providence produced the Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint in 200 B.C. The LXX was the Bible of the first century believer. The LXX was Jesus’ Bible. All of the OT quotes in Hebrews are from the LXX not the Hebrew and Aramaic.

2. When the Roman Empire succeeded the Greeks and Latin replaced Greek as the universal language of Europe and the common language of the people, God in His providence led Jerome, a textual critic who used the Old Latin Bible, to write the Latin Vulgate in 405. Jerome also was criticized for producing a new translation. The Latin Vulgate is important for two reasons

a) It was the Bible of the people for 1000 years.

b) Jerome’s Latin Vulgate became the basis for the first English Bible in 1350, Wycliffe’s Bible.

3. When English replaced Latin as the common language of the common people, God in His providence produced English translations.

a) The first was the John Wycliffe’s English N. T. translation in 1380 and two years later the Old Testament.

Wycliffe wanted to reform the corrupt RC whose priesthood generally was immoral. For this reason, Wycliffe is called, “The Morning Star of the Reformation.” Wycliffe believed if the common people had the Bible in their own language, they would demand a reformation of the church. Since 1229, the RCC had forbidden the use of the Bible to laymen. “The Word was precious or rare in those days” (1 Samuel 3:1).

Because Wycliffe knew no Hebrew and no Greek, he translated directly from the Latin Vulgate into the English vernacular. Wycliffe’s traveling preachers whom he trained called the Lollard’s went everywhere  preaching and circulating Wycliffe’s English Bible. The RCC was infuriated that laypeople had the Bible in their language. One RCC Bishop complained, “The jewel of the clergy has become the toy of the laity.”

In 1401, King Henry IV enacted a statue making “heresy” a secular crime punishable by burning. The heresy was spreading the Word of God in the common language of the people. The RCC courts began trying “heretics” and hauling convicted ones over to the secular courts for burning. The lay preachers, the Lollards, undaunted continued to preach and disseminate the English Bible. Then the RCC in England did what no other country had ever done. They forbad the circulation of the Bible in the common language of the people.

A penalty of burning was enforced for anyone owning or even reading the English Scriptures. In 1414 another Church decree banned Wycliffe’s books and warned that anyone who was caught reading the English Bible would “forfeit land, cattle, life, and goods from their heirs forever.”

The price of one copy of Scripture was expensive antedating the invention of the printing press. Many Christians were willing to pay large sums of money just to read the Scriptures for an hour or two. People would give a whole load of hay just to have the Scripture for an hour. We are unlike the believers of Wycliffe’s day. We are inundated with English Bibles. Also we are unwilling with freedom to read, study, memorize and meditate.

After Wycliffe died the RCC ordered Wycliffe’s books burned, his bones dug up, burned and scattered over the river flowing through Lutterworth, Wycliffe’s town.

In Part 2 we will consider William Tyndale’s English Bible.

Why are there only 66 Books in the Bible? Part 2

Posted: October 1, 2010 in Bible
3

How did the Old Testament canon develop?

If a church council did not determine which books belong in the Bible, what did? The providence of God determined the O.T. canon not any church council. The canon gradually grew as succeeding prophets recognized the former books as the Word of God.

The books of Moses. The 10 commandments (Dt. 10:5) were the first collected words (More followed: Dt. 31:24-26). The  books of Moses were recognized as canonical (Joshua 1:7). Joshua was later recognized (Judges 1:1). The book of  Judges was then recognized (Ruth 1:1). Ruth was the introduction to the books of Samuel. The books of Samuel were recognized by 1st Kings 9:5. The books of Chronicles were recognized by Ezra/Nehemiah (Ezra 1:1, 2). Job was recognized by Ezekiel 14:14-20. The book of Psalms was recognized by 2nd Sam. 23:2. Solomon’s writings were recognized in 1st Kings 4:32. Jeremiah was recognized Daniel 9:1, 2. The providence of God determined the O.T., not a church council.

Can we be confident of the Old Testament canon?

There are over 250 N. T. quotations of O. T. books and none from the Apocrypha. Christ’s identified the O. T. canon (Luke 11:51) and not the Apocrypha.

The table of contents of the Hebrew Bible is different in two areas. First, the number of books. The Hebrew Bible has 22 books because some books were considered one like Nehemiah and Ezra. Next, the order of books. Jesus states the extent of the O.T. canon in Luke 11:51. The O.T. religious leaders had shed the blood of God’s prophets from Genesis (“Abel”) to Chronciles (the last book in the Hebrew Bible which records the murder of Zacharias). Other righteous men were murdered as recorded in the Apocrypha, but the Lord does not include them as part of the canon.

The question in this debate is this: Does the church have authority over the Bible or does the Bible have authority over the church? Did the church give birth to the Scripture or did the Scripture give birth to the Church?

The Roman Catholic view is the church has authority over the Bible.

Roman Catholic Johann Eck in his debate with Martin Luther said: “The Scriptures are not authentic, except by the authority of the church” (John Eck, Enchiridion of Commonplaces, trans. by Ford Lewis Battles, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979, 13).

The Vatican II in 1967 also presented this view: “It is clear therefore, that sacred tradition, sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the church are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in his own way under the action of the Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation souls.”

The Protestant view is the Bible has authority over the church.

God used fallible men to write an infallible Scripture. A few examples are David in the O.T. and Peter in the N.T. God used fallible men to recognize an infallible list of books of Scripture. God has preserved His Word according to Matthew 5: 17-18: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”

 

Why are there only 66 Books in the Bible? Part 1

Posted: October 1, 2010 in Bible
Tags: , , ,
5

You might be surprised that part of the debate over the canon of Scripture has to do with the Roman Catholic view of the canon and that some Protestants have joined the Roman Catholic Church over this canon of Scripture issue.

But let’s start with a definition before we get into the debate. Here is how Wayne Grudem defines the canon: “The Canon of Scripture is the list of books that belong in the Bible.”

The word canon (Greek kanon) in Gal. 6:16 means a measuring instrument. The word came to mean, a rule of action, which applied to the list of books in Bible which met certain tests or rules, to finally that collection of books that becomes our rule of life.

We believe that list of books is complete in obedience to Deuteronomy 4:2: “You shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish ought from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”

Not everyone, however, agrees. The debate over the canon is heard in such questions:

“Who decided these and only these books would be in the Bible?” “What about Paul’s lost letter (1st Cor. 5:9) or the Laodicean letter (Col. 4:16)?” “What about books now in the Bible that once were rejected? (Song of  Solomon, Ecclesiastes, and Esther).” “What about James? James was rejected by Martin Luther.“

Luther placed James at the end of the N. T., saying, “I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle; and my reasons follow. In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works . . . . Therefore, I cannot include him among the chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him” ( Luther’s Words, XXXV.396-397 E. Theodore Bachmann (ed.) in A General Introduction to the Bible by Norman Geisler).

Some Roman Catholics I have talked to love the book of James, because they wrongly think James 2:24 teaches justification by works. Martin Luther battled the R.C.C. and perhaps this is part of the reason why he had a hard time with the book of James.

What about the Apocrypha (14 additional books in the R.C.C. Bible)?

Here is what R.C.C. believes about the canon:

1. R.C.C. decided which books would be in the Bible including the Apocrypha.

Stephen and Janet Ray converted from Protestantism to R.C. over this issue.

“Protestants are dependent on the tradition of the Catholic Church for the current N.T.” (Crossing the Tiber p. 54). A church council in A.D. 397 recognized the books of the Bible as canonical.

2.  R.C.C. has to be infallible to produce an infallible list of books.

3.  R.C.C. gives authority to the Bible.

“There is no list of canonical books anywhere” (George Sim. Johnston Protestants and Sola Scriptura at www.Catholic.net). The Roman Catholic reasoning is, since there is no list of canonical books, there has to be an outside authority to determine which books belong in Scripture. My refutation of this view is that God gave authority to Scriptures, not a church, and each book was canonical the moment it was written.

4.  R.C.C., if infallible, gives authority to church traditions.

This view is stated clearly in the following quote from the Roman Catholic Council at Trent. “The Old and New Testaments, since one God is the author of both; also the traditions, whether they relate to faith or to morals, as having been dictated either orally by Christ or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church in unbroken succession” (The Council of Trent of 1545).

Because of this attitude when you tell a Catholic, the Bible doesn’t teach purgatory, their response is, “But tradition does!”

In Part 2, I will discuss how did the Old Testament canon developed.

Do Scribal Errors Destroy Inerrancy? Part 2

Posted: September 22, 2010 in Bible
0

Textual critics help us determine the wording of the NT.

Jerome was an early textual critic who produced the Latin Vulgate in the 380s. Desiderius Erasmus is the most celebrated textual critic who was a Dutch Roman Catholic scholar. Erasmus produced the first published Gk NT in 1516. Erasmus’ fourth edition became the basis for the Textus Receptus which in turn became the basis for the KJV. Erasmus compared 4 or 5 minuscule manuscripts (or what is referred as the Majority Text). The translators of the KJV were Anglicans who baptized babies. “God can use a crooked stick to draw a straight line”.

Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-92) published The New Testament in the Original Greek  in 1881 which was based on the older uncials and called the Critical Text.

KJV

Based on the Majority Text. Majority Text is based on minuscule manuscripts called the Syrian Family of manuscripts which is not as old (9th -15th centuries) but there are more of them (4,643).

NIV

Based on the Critical Text. Critical Text is based on uncial manuscripts called Alexandrian family of manuscripts which is older (4th -9th centuries) but fewer (297 uncial manuscripts).

Is there a great difference between these two families of manuscripts?

John Anthony Hort (1828-92) published The New Testament in the Original Greek  in 1881 and wrote this in his introduction: “The amount of what can in any sense be called substantial variation is but a small fraction….and can hardly form more than a thousandth part of the entire text.” This would occupy less than one page in the entire NT.

Does the NIV take away from the deity of Christ? (compare John 1:18 in KJV and NIV). The NIV in this verse has the stronger statement on the deity of Christ.

Here is another Ruckman argument:

“At Bob Jones they say, ‘Why, Ruckman teaches the heresy of double inspiration. A translation can’t be inspired.’ Why, in the New Testament there are more than forty quotations from the Old Testament. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew; the New Testament was written in Greek. When Mathew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, Jude, and Paul sat down to write and quote the Old Testament, they had to translate from Hebrew to Greek and write down the translation. When Matthew said, “It might fulfilled which was spoken” (Matt. 2:15), he’s quoting Hebrew, and he’s writing the Hebrew down in Greek. If no translations is inspired, then the original of Matthew wasn’t inspired because what he wrote down was a translation of Hebrew. Matthew said, “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel” (Matt. 1:22-23). He’s quoting Isaiah. What’s Isaiah written in? Hebrew. What’s Matthew written in? Greek. He’s translating. If you can’t inspire a translation, you can’t even count on the New Testament in Greek because it’s a translation from the Old Testament in Hebrew.” (Ruckman, Peter. Why I Believe the King James Bible Is the Word of God. Bible Baptist Bookstore, Pensacola, p.7).

Here is my response: The original autographs of the O.T. were inspired. The copies of the O.T. manuscripts were not inspired. Sometimes the scribes made scribal errors in copying the copies as we just documented. Does this mean that God’s Word has errors? NO! It means that are some scribal errors in the copies. When the N.T. authors quoted from the copies of the originals, they were directed by the Holy Spirit to do so and what they wrote was inspired and inerrant. The Holy Spirit also led the N.T. writers to quote from the uninspired LXX (Septuagent) and even pagan writers (Acts 17:28). Does mean that the pagan writers that Paul quoted in Acts 17:28 were inspired? NO! All faithful translations have preserved God’s inspired Word where they reflect the original text and in that blessed truth we can rejoice.

Do Scribal Errors Destroy Inerrancy? Part 1

Posted: September 22, 2010 in Bible
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

Inerrancy, like inspiration, applies to the original manuscripts. Has God preserved His Word? YES! But not in one translation. God has preserved His Word in the totality of all the manuscripts and there are over 5000 existing manuscripts in part or in whole. No two manuscripts are exactly the same. God has not preserved His Word in one manuscript or translation. But He has preserved His Word in the totality of all the manuscripts and translations, where ever those translations faithfully reflect the original text.

Inerrancy does not apply to any one translation today. Some who believe the KJV is the only translation, as does Peter Ruckman, imply that the KJV translators were inspired and could make no mistakes.

Here is one of Ruckman’s arguments from his book Why I Believe The King James Bible: “Read 1st John 2:23, ‘Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.’ Notice that half the verse is in italics. When the King James translators came to that verse, they couldn’t find half the verse in the Greek manuscripts, but they said, ‘It seems like it belongs there,’ so they wrote it in italics. Do you know what happened two hundred years afterwards: Greek manuscripts were found that had the half of the verse that was put italics. You had better watch that Book (KJV)! That Book (KJV) speaks about talking in an “unknown” tongue (1st Cor. 14:2), and somebody says, “The word ‘unknown’ isn’t in the original.” You mean you haven’t found a copy that’s got it yet? You had better watch that Book (KJV)” (p.11).

In other words, Ruckman is implying that the KJV translators could make no mistakes, putting them on the same level as the authors of Scripture. 2nd Tim. 3:16 says that “all Scripture is inspired by God” not translations. 2nd Pet. 1:21 says “holy men of God spoke as they moved by the Holy Spirit” not translators. I preach and teach out of the KJV but it is not the only translation God is using because God has not preserved His Word in one manuscript or translation but God has preserved His Word in the totality of all the manuscripts and translations that faithfully reflect the original text.

A book, I would recommend on this subject is A General Introduction to the Bible by Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix. There is also a revised and expanded edition out now. The edited edition is called From God to Us by the same authors. Chapter eight is entitled Restoration of the Bible Text. In this chapter these two theologians who believe in inerrancy of the original Scriptures, like Ryrie, deal with variant readings in the manuscripts.

Geisler and Nix discuss unintentional and intentional scribal errors.

Unintentional scribal errors come from errors of the eye, transposition or the reversal of the position of two letters, errors of the ear, errors of judgment, and errors of writing. They give examples for all of these kinds of scribal errors. This is a must read if any student of God’s Word would desires to seriously deal with this issue.

They write about scribal errors in regard to numbers in translations. Remember, there were no errors with numbers in the original writings nor errors of any kind. “Transposition is the reversal of position of two letters or words, technically known as metathesis….This is especially true of Hebrew letters which were used as numerals too. The confusion of such numbers in the Old Testament may be seen in the conflicts of parallel passages. See, for example, 40,000 in 1 Kings 4:26 as opposed to 4,000 in 2 Chronicles 9:25; the 42 years in 2 Chronicles 22:2 in contrast to the correct reading of 22 years in 2 Kings 8:26 also fits into this category” (From God to Us, page 178).

1 Kings 4:26 says, “And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.” The exact parallel account in 2 Chronicles 9:25 reads, “And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.”

2 Chronicles 22:2 says, “Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.” The exact parallel account in 2 Kings 8:26 reads, “Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.

Another example of scribal errors with numbers is in 2 Sam. 24:13 which reads, “So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? Or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? Or that there be three days’ pestilence in thy land? Now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.”

The exact parallel passage must be consulted to determine if there is a scribal error. The exact parallel passage is 1 Chronicles 21:11-12: “So Gad came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee either three years’ famine or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of the LORD, even pestilence, in the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying throughout all the coasts of Israel. Now therefore advise thyself.”

These scribal errors with numbers must be admitted and not seen as a threat to the inerrancy of the original documents which had either “seven” or “three.” To go to other contexts and pull out numbers that are not related to this story in 2 Sam. 24 and 1 Chr. 21 does more harm than good in answering this issue. The three year famine from 2 Sam 21:1 is not related to the famine mentioned in 2 Sam 24. In 2 Sam 21:1 David enquired what was the reason for this particular three year famine and the Lord answered, “It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites.” The issue in 2 Sam 24 is not Saul’s sin it is David’s sin. These are two separate stories. The three year famine from 2 Sam 21, therefore cannot be pulled out of context to solve the variant in 2 Sam. 24. God has preserved His Word, but not in one translation. Inerrancy applies only to the originals.

In Part 2, we will discuss the importance of textual critics to determine what was written in the inspired and inerrant original writings.

The Apocrypha, Part 2

Posted: October 5, 2009 in Bible
Tags: ,
4

None of the Apocrypha passes the test of canonicity which include the following as stated by Geisler and Nix (p. 175).

1. Inspired Books of the Bible Must be written by a prophet.

2. Inspired Books of the Bible Must be spiritually qualified. The Apocrypha is not transforming and does not have the authority of God.

3. Inspired Books of the Bible Must be received by the church at large. The Apocrypha was rejected by the authors of apocryphal 1 Maccabees 9:27 (100 B.C.): “The memory of an authoritative prophet among the people was one that belonged to the distant past, for the author could speak of a great distress ‘such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them’ (1 Macc. 9:27; cf. 14:41)’ (Grudem, p. 56).

The Apocrypha was rejected by Josephus (born A.D. 37/38). The Apocrypha was rejected by Jesus and the writers of Scripture. The N.T. writers quote over 250 times from the O.T. but never from the Apocyrpha (Geisler and Nix, p. 175).

Wayne Gruden gives four reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha (p.59)

1. They do not claim to be the Word of God.

2. They were not regarded to be the Word of God by the Jewish people.

3. They were not regarded to be the Word of God by Jesus or the N.T. writers.

4. They teach false doctrine.

Why was the Apocrypha included in the early Bible?

The Apocrypha was included in the Septuagint which was the Greek Bible of the early church. There were two canons in the early church. One was the Palestinian Canon. This is the Hebrew Canon which originated in Palestine with the same O.T. books as our English Bible. This was the canon of the Jews.

There other was the Alexandrian Canon. This was the Greek Canon with an additional 14 or 15 books which originated in Alexandria, Egypt and where the Septuagint was written in 250 B.C.

Athanasius, bishop of Alexander, in A.D. 367 wrote concerning the Apocrypha, that these are “not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Father to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the words of godliness.”

Martin Luther in his German translation wrote: “The Apocryphal Books, which are not to be held equal to Holy Scripture, but are useful and good to read.” For example, I Maccabees is one of the best written historical accounts of the Maccabean revolt in the 2nd century BC.

Why was the Apocrypha included in the 1611 KJV?

The earliest English editions follow the example of Luther in disclaiming the Apocrypha. The Coverdale’s English Bible (1535) wrote: “Apocrypha: the bokes and treatises which amonge the fathers of old are not rekened to be of like authorite with the other bokes of the byble, nether are they founde in the Canon of Hebrue.”

The later English editions blurred the differences between the Apocrypha and the inspired books of the O.T. The Great Bible of 1541 omitted any disclaimer and listed the Apocryphal books stating: “The fourth part of the Bible, containing these bokes.” The Geneva Bible (1560) returned to Luther’s position: “These bokes that follow in order after the Prophets vnto the New Testament, are called Apocrypha, that is bokes, which were not receiued by a commune consent to be red and expounded publikely in the Church, nether yet serued to proue any point of Christian religion, saue in asmuche as they had the consent of the other Scriptures called Canonical to confirme the same.” The Geneva Bible (1599 edition) became the first English Bible printed without the Apocrypha.

It is not surprising that Puritans and Separatists in England were not pleased when the new translation authorized by King James was published in 1611 including the Apocrypha, without the traditional disclaimers concerning their non-canonical status. In 1615 the archbishop of Canterbury, the Anglican counterpart to the pope, decreed that anyone who bound or sold a Bible without the Apocrypha would suffer a year’s imprisonment. It took nearly twenty years of pressure from public outcry before the king finally relented and authorized the publication of an edition without the Apocrypha (1629) (From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man, pp. 44, 45)

Conclusion: Only the 39 books of the O.T. and the 27 of the N.T. are “given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2nd Tim. 3:16, 17).

Older Entries