If there be any virtue

In the Facebook Textus Receptus Academy group, I pointed out a certain modus operandi that Mark Ward used in his video “Five False Friends Staring with ‘D’.” This is in the context of declaring a KJV word no longer means what it meant in 1611. I used “debate” to give the example. 

1. Define a word in a way that limits its range of meaning. Debate = a formal discussion on a particular topic...
2. Fail to include other definitions in the semantic range. Debate (1st definition in the modern Merriam-Webster online dictionary) = a contention by words or arguments. (Contention, one of the very words Mark said it “used to mean.”)
3. Declare you proved your point.
4. Easy peasy.

This is something that runs through his work (ergo, modus operandi). He did it on December 23 with the word “virtue” in the video “Virtue Went Out of Jesus?”[i]

1. Define a word in a way that limits its range of meaning. Virtue = behavior showing high moral standards....
2. Fail to include other definitions in the semantic range. Virtue (2nd definition in the modern Merriam-Webster online dictionary) = a beneficial quality or power of a thing. (Power, one of the very words Mark said it “used to mean.”)
3. Declare you proved your point. 

In the New Testament (King James Bible), the word “virtue” occurs seven times in six verses. Four times it carries a meaning and connotation of moral excellence (ἀρετή; Philippians 4:8; 2 Peter 1:3, 5). The other three times, where virtue carries a meaning and connotation of power, representing the Greek word δύναμις.

• Mark 5:30 And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes?
• Luke 6:19 And the whole multitude sought to touch him: for there went virtue out of him, and healed them all.
• Luke 8:46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.

In other places the King James translators translate the word δύναμις as power. I believe there are at least three reasons why they chose to use virtue instead of power in Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, and Luke 8:46.

1. The translators did not tie themselves to uniformity of phrasing, and Greek words might vary in connotation. “…we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there be some words that be not of the same sense everywhere) we were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty.”
2. The translators followed the wording of the English Bibles that came before them. The Bishops, Geneva, 1557 Geneva NT, Great Bible, Taverner, Matthew, Coverdale, and Tyndale had “virtue” in these three texts of Scripture. The only exception is that Coverdale had “the power” in Mark 5:30).
3. The translators probably thought virtue carried some connotation useful to the context, such as “excellency” in connection with power, like the excellency of power inherent in Jesus as deity (see OED I.1, 1933, p. 238), or the effect of the power. Using “virtue” over and over in reference to the power of Jesus Christ versus the brazen serpent Ralph Robinson wrote, “Virtue doth really go forth from Christ to the Sin-bitten sinner, for the healing of him” and that “Christ excells the brazen Serpent in 11 particulars” (Christ All in All, 2nd edition, London: John Rothwell, 1660, p. 553).[ii]

One of Mark’s problems is that he thinks the “uppermost sense of” the word in a person’s mind governs the “meaning” of the word, and then sets out of prove that point in ways that often veer too far from consistently comprehensive inspection of sound words.[iii] We know that people (most all people) will normally travel to the first sense they know for a word to try to make sense of it. We deny that folks cannot and should not learn to interpret words in their context, and with much diligence.

---

[i] Mark did a modified version of his m.o. with the word “issue” in “Mr. Median Meets the Woman with the Issue of Blood.” If you check with discernment, you will see this kind of stuff occurs over and over.

1. Define a word in a way that limits its range of meaning. Issue = personal difficulties or problems....
2. Fail to include other definitions in the semantic range. Issue (4th definition in the modern Merriam-Webster online dictionary) = a discharge (as of blood) from the body. (Exactly the “issue” Mark is talking about in Leviticus 12:7 and Matthew 9:20. He eventually admits this one is slippery, but claims it is just too uncommon for modern folks to understand.)
3. Declare you proved your point.

[ii] Ralph Robinson was pastor of St. Mary Wolnoth in London. The sermon “Christe the true brazen Serpent” was preached in January of 1654. Robinson specifically mentions Luke 6:19 and 8:46 in the context quoted.  In his sermon A Sermon of Spirituall Life and Death, John Preston used power and virtue (virtue) as synonyms, but several times in a way that suggests he sees a slightly different range of meaning. (London: T. C., 1630, pp. 17-19; preached in November 1626). He also writes, “when Iron comes neere the Load-stone, there goes a virtue from the Load-stone that draws the Iron to it…” In A Christian Dictionary, Thomas Wilson gives as “No. 2” meaning of “Virtue” – Power and might, or the effect of power, Luke 8, 46. Vertue is gone out of me; that is, there is some healthfull effect wrought by my power.” (London: William Iaggad, 1622).
[iii] For example, in “Three False Friends in One Important Verse” (Psalm 2:1), Mark fails to engage with a New Testament verse that refers to the verse he is discussing. He is so focused on his “word study,” that he does not engage in “Bible study.” How can we maintain consistency as Bible believers and not do that. Additionally, when building his false friend case he goes back to find what the OED might say a word meant in 1611 (looking for a definition to confirm his point), but he seldom, if ever, looks for sermons or commentary from that period to see how a contemporary might interpret or understand the word in its biblical context. It seems that Mark stops searching when he finds what he hopes to find.