Translate

Showing posts with label New Testament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Testament. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 08, 2025

Cain and Abel

Cain.

Old Testament. (Cain is mentioned in Genesis 4)

  • He is the first-mentioned child of Adam & Eve. Genesis 4:1
  • He was a tiller of the ground. Genesis 4:2
  • He brought of the fruit of the ground as an offering. Genesis 4:3
  • His offering was not respected by God. Genesis 4:5a
  • He became angry with God and his brother. Genesis 4:5b ff.
  • He killed Abel, his brother. Genesis 4:8ff.
  • He was punished by God. Genesis 4:9ff.
  • He took a wife and had children. Genesis 4:16ff.

New Testament. (Cain is mentioned 3 times in the NT)

  • Hebrews 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
  • 1 John 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s righteous.
  • Jude 1:11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.
  • Cain’s offering was not by faith. Hebrews 11:4
  • He followed the wicked one, his spiritual father. 1 John 3:12
  • His works were evil. 1 John 3:12 (He did not become evil because he slew his brother, but he slew his brother because he was evil.)
  • He had his own way. Jude 1:11 (Proverbs 14:12; 16:25)

Abel.

Old Testament. (Abel is mentioned in Genesis 4)

  • He is the second-mentioned child of Adam & Eve. Genesis 4:2
  • He was a keeper of sheep. Genesis 4:2
  • He brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof, as an offering. Genesis 4:4a
  • His offering was respected by God. Genesis 4:4b
  • His brother talked to him. Genesis 4:8a
  • He was killed by his brother, Cain. Genesis 4:8b
  • His blood cried for retribution. Genesis 4:10-11
  • He was “replaced” by his brother Seth. Genesis 4:25

New Testament. (Abel is mentioned 4 times in the NT)

  • He is called righteous (his blood requires retribution). Matthew 23:35; Luke 11:51
  • His offering was by faith. Hebrews 11:4
  • His blood does not speak as well as Christ’s. Hebrews 12:24.
  • Matthew 23:35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
  • Luke 11:51 from the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
  • Hebrews 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
  • Hebrews 12:24 and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Why did God accept Abel’s sacrifice and not Cain’s sacrifice? 

  • (Note: both Cain and his offering were not accepted.) 
  • Abel was righteous and Cain was unrighteous. Matthew 23:35; Hebrews 11:4; John 3:12
  • Abel and his sacrifice were accepted by faith. Hebrews 11:4
  • Cain and his sacrifice were unacceptable because of no faith. Hebrews 11:4; compare Hebrews 11.
  • 1 John 3:12 states that Cain was “of that wicked one.” Jude compares Cain to false prophets that had went Cain’s way and were like, “spots in your feasts of charity…” (Jude 11-12). 
  • Hebrews 11:6 - “without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”
  • “An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin” (Proverbs 21:4).

Cain gave his sacrifice:

  1. from a wicked heart 
  2. without faith

Wednesday, October 18, 2023

The New Covenant

Jeremiah 31:31-34 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Hebrews 8:8-13 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Comments from Crossway:

The old covenant was thus breakable but not bad itself. Though the apostle Paul is often enlisted in Christian theology to criticize the old covenant, he asserts in more than one place that the OT law is fundamentally good (e.g., Rom. 7:12, 16; 1 Tim. 1:8).

Given such theological continuity, why does the writer of Hebrews emphasize discontinuity in stating that “Now hath [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” (Heb. 8:6–7)? And, following a full citation of Jeremiah 31:31–34 (Heb. 8:8–12, the longest quotation of the OT in the NT), the passage continues, “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” (Heb. 8:13). It is crucial in this respect that the author of Hebrews introduces the Jeremiah quotation with the editorial phrase, “For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord...” (Heb. 8:8). That is, the fault of the old covenant (8:7) lay in how the people themselves were faulty and prone to breaking it (Heb. 8:8a), thus incurring the need for the “new covenant,” which follows in the passage (Heb. 8:8b–12).5 Indeed, the writer to the Hebrews explains that Yahweh instituted the better promises of the new covenant for this reason: “They continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord” (Heb. 8:9).

--

It is a new covenant, unlike the old covenant.

The old covenant was breakable.

The new covenant is sure.

Friday, January 06, 2023

Anna of Asher, a prophetess

Luke 2:36-38 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity; And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.

3 things about who Anna was:

  • She was a prophetess, verse 36.
  • She was the daughter of Phanuel, verse 36.
  • She was of the tribe of Aser (Asher), verse 36.

6 other things about Anna the prophetess:

  • She was old (“of a great age” | 84+7+ca.14=ca.105) verse 36.
  • She was a widow (had been a widow 84 years) verse 37.
  • She had been faithful in youth (“from her virginity”) verse 36.
  • She had been faithful in marriage. (“lived with an husband”) verse 36.
  • She was faithful in old age (“served God with fastings and prayers”) verse 37.
  • She was directed by God’s providence (“coming in that instant”) verse 38.

3 things about what Anna the prophetess did:

  • She departed not from the temple, verse 37.
  • She gave thanks unto the Lord for the Christ child, verse 38.
  • She spoke of the Christ and of the redemption of Israel, verse 38.

Tuesday, December 20, 2022

The Nazarene

But when he [i.e., Joseph] heard that Archelaus did reign in Judæa in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee: and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.[i] Matthew 2:22-23.

The historical incident

Matthew 2:23 records the historical incident of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus journeying from the land of Egypt to the city of Nazareth. After coming out of their exile of safety in Egypt, they returned to Nazareth. Because of God’s warning, they did not stop in Judæa but continued on to their former home in Galilee. There Jesus grew from boyhood to manhood (cf. Luke 2:51-52; 4:16).

Nazareth was a village in the region of Galilee, part of the land of Naphtali (Joshua 21:32; 2 Kings 15:29, et al.). Galilee bordered and was west of the Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee. Isaiah 9:1 suggests a region jutting into or surrounded by “the nations,” Gentiles, a non-Jewish population (cf. Matthew 4:15). Magdala (Matthew 15:39), Tiberias (John 6:1, 23), and Capernaum (Matthew 4:13) were on the Sea of Galilee. Nazareth and nearby Cana (John 2:1ff.) were about halfway between the Sea of Galilee and the Mediterranean Sea.

As cities go, Nazareth was small and insignificant. Neither the Hebrew Old Testament, the Apocrypha, the writings of Josephus, nor the Talmud mention the city of Nazareth. It first shows up in the Bible in the Gospels, as the town of Mary and Joseph (cf. Luke 1:26; 2:4; Matthew 2:23; 4:13).[ii] Joseph and Mary had lived in Nazareth before traveling to Bethlehem because of the taxation (cf. Luke 2:4-5), and thither they eventually return.

One commonly accepted belief about the origin of the name of the city is that it derives from the Hebrew word netzer (or nēser, netser נֵצֶר). The Old Testament Hebrew uses this word four times, including Isaiah 11:1.[iii]

“…the name, Nazareth, is from the Hebrew word netzer, which is translated ‘branch’ in the English language. Several of the Old Testament prophets predict the coming of Christ as ‘the Branch,’ or a synonymous term.”[iv]

Concerning the name of the city, John Gill writes:

A Nazarene, as David de Pomis says,{[v]}

“is one that is born in the city Netzer, which is said to be in the land of Galilee, three days journey distant from Jerusalem.”

The prophetical equivalent

The historical incident of Jesus’s family returning to Nazareth coincides with the fulfillment of prophecy. Matthew explicitly and unequivocally connects Jesus being a called “a Nazarene” with his dwelling in Nazareth.[vi] What is the prophecy? What does it mean?

In its simplest meaning, a Nazarene is a man from Nazareth.[vii] But why is “a Nazarene” significant? We cannot search the Old Testament and find the word Nazareth, much less Nazarene. Note that in verse 23 Matthew writes prophets plural, rather than citing one specific prophet. Rather than “fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,” it is “fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets.” Compare Matthew 1:22; 2:15, 17; 3:4; 4:14; 8:17 and other places, where he is stating a specific prophecy by a specific prophet. This should shortly (or at least eventually) suggest to us that Matthew is connecting a theme of prophecy, a general sense, rather than a direct statement found in one particular place.

But what is that theme? What is the sense? Unlike Bethlehem, the town of King David where Jesus was born, Nazareth was an obscure town in a despised region of the country. Commenting on Matthew 2:23, Matthew Henry wrote:

“Thither they were sent, and there they were well known, and were among their relations; the most proper place for them to be in. There they continued, and from thence our Saviour was called Jesus of Nazareth, which was to the Jews a stumbling-block, for, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” [and “out of Galilee ariseth no prophet” they thought.]

Henry continues on this theme:

“…He shall be called a Nazarene. Which may be looked upon…As a name of reproach and contempt…Now this was not particularly foretold by any one prophet, but, in general, it was spoken by the prophets, that he should be despised and rejected of men (Isa. liii. 2, 3), a Worm, and no man (Ps. xxii. 6, 7), that he should be an Alien to his brethren, Ps. lxix. 7, 8.”

Albert Barnes put it this way.

“He does not say ‘by the prophet,’ as in Matthew 1:22; Matthew 2:5, Matthew 2:15, but ‘by the prophets,’ meaning no one prophet particularly, but the general character of the prophecies. As Jerome observes,[viii] he shows that he took not the words from the prophets, but only the sense.”[ix]

The high and holy eternal Son of God became the meek and lowly (Matthew 11:29; Zechariah 9:9), of no reputation, the reputation of a Nazarene. The prophets, plural, prophesied this theme about the Messiah to come. Jesus fulfilled it.

Prophets prophesy

  • Psalm 22:6-8 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.
  • Psalm 69:7-8a Because for thy sake I have borne reproach; shame hath covered my face. I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my mother’s children.
  • Psalm 118:22  The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.
  • Isaiah 53:2-3 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
  • Isaiah 53:12 …he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
  • Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off…
  • Zechariah 9:9 …behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Jesus Christ fulfills

  • Matthew 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
  • Mark 8:31 And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.
  • Luke 17:25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
  • John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
  • John 1:46 And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip saith unto him, Come and see.
  • John 7:52 They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.
  • John 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
  • Acts 3:14-15 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; and killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
  • Philippians 2:6-8 …Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
  • Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death…

Called a “Nazarene” i.e., Jesus of Nazareth, by:

  • a multitude in Jerusalem (Jesus the prophet of Nazareth ιησους ο προφητης ο απο ναζαρεθ, Matthew 21:11)
  • a maid in Jerusalem (Jesus of Nazareth ιησου του ναζωραιου, Matthew 26:71; του ναζαρηνου ιησου ησθα Mark 14:67  )
  • by demons (Jesus of Nazareth ιησου ναζαρηνε, Mark 1:24; Luke 4:34)
  • a crowd on the Jericho road, heard by blind Bartimæus (Jesus of Nazareth ιησους ο ναζωραιος, Mark 10:47; Luke 18:37)
  • an angel (ιησουν ζητειτε τον ναζαρηνον Mark 16:16)
  • disciples on the way to Emmaus (Jesus of Nazareth ιησου του ναζωραιου Luke 24:19)
  • Philip (Jesus of Nazareth ιησουν τον υιον του ιωσηφ τον απο ναζαρεθ John 1:45)
  • officers of the priests (Jesus of Nazareth ιησουν τον ναζωραιον, John 18:5, 7)
  • someone writing by the authority of Pilate (Jesus of Nazareth ιησους ο ναζωραιος, John 19:19)

In an ingenious display of the low and humble estate of Jesus, Luke 4:28-30 shows that even the despised citizens at the synagogue of the despised city of Nazareth despise and reject Jesus the Nazarene, intending to cast him down the brow of the hill on which Nazareth was built. Oh, the power and wonder, too – “But he passing through the midst of them went his way.” See Matthew 13:54-58, another occasion where “they were offended in him” and showed him no honour – he whom they contemptuously considered the native carpenter’s son. Although the Nazarene prophet was without honour in his own country, in his own city, in his own house, yet at the name of the Nazarene carpenter’s son every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess “that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

The Lowly Nazarene (by William Henry Gardner, 1866-1932).

1. Jesus knows earth’s cares and sorrows,
Through Death’s valley has He been,
At the bench He toiled and suffered,
Christ, the “Lowly Nazarene.”
 
2. His great heart will bear our burdens,
On Him you can ever lean,
He knows all our hopes and longings,
Christ, the “Lowly Nazarene.”
 
3. Comfort gives He to the beggar,
Freely as unto a Queen,
For His love indeed is boundless,
Christ, the “Lowly Nazarene.”
 
Chorus:
Lord of earth and sky forever,
Christ, the Lord, with pow’r supreme!
Born of woman in a manger,
Once a “Lowly Nazarene.”

We see Jesus the Nazarene, the Son of God who made himself of no reputation, lower than the angels for the suffering of death – the death we deserved and his death that paid the penalty for sin. With the songwriter Charles H. Gabriel, “I stand amazed in the presence of Jesus the Nazarene.”

Amen.


[i] 23 και ελθων κατωκησεν εις πολιν λεγομενην ναζαρεθ οπως πληρωθη το ρηθεν δια των προφητων οτι ναζωραιος κληθησεται Matthew 1:23 in 1894 Textus Receptus.
[ii] Some mythicists (people who think that Jesus never existed) place high stock in the fact of lack of prior mention, hoping to use it to support their own myth. However, neither faith nor facts support their diversion. In 2009, Israeli archaeologists found what they believed were the remains of a dwelling in Nazareth that can be dated to the time of Jesus. Archaeologist Yardena Alexandre, excavations director at the Israel Antiquities Authority, said that their finds suggested that Nazareth was a small out-of-the-way city populated by Jews of modest means. See “Nazareth dwelling discovery may shed light on boyhood of Jesus,” as well as “Did First-Century Nazareth Exist” and “Jesus’ House? 1st-Century Structure May Be Where He Grew Up.”
[iii] For four uses of netzer (sprout, shoot, branch) in Old Testament, see Isaiah 11:1; 14:19; 60:21; Daniel 11:7.
[iv] Old Testament in Matthew, Volume I, J. W. Griffith, Pasadena, TX: White Printing, 1994, p. 28.
[v] De Pomis, 1525-after 1593, a notable Italian Jewish physician and philosopher, in Ẓemaḥ Dawid (i.e., The Offspring of David), Hebrew Lexicon, fol. 141. 2., 1587.
[vi] Nazarene – an inhabitant of the village of Nazareth. This has been often confused with Nazarite. A common misreading or misinterpretation of “Nazarene” is that it means “Nazarite.” However, Matthew does not say Nazarite, and Jesus was not a Nazarite.
[vii] Followers of the Nazarene were sometimes called Nazarenes. “For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:” (Acts 24:5). In addition, sometimes “Christians are called Notzrim by Israelis in the Middle East.” See “Jesus “the Nazarene” – what is behind the title?
[viii] Et veniens habitavit in civitate, quae vocatur Nazareth ut adimpleretur quod dictum est per prophetas, quoniam Nazareus vocabitur. Si fixum de Scripturis posulsset exemplu, numquam diceret, quod dictum est per prophetas; sed simpliciter, quod dictum est per prophetam: nune autem pluraliter prophetas vocans, ostendit se non verba de Scripturis sumpsisse, sed sensum. Nazaraeus, sanctus interpretatur. Sanctum autem Dominum futurum, omnis Sciptura commemorat. Possumus et aliter dicere, quod etiam verbis, juxta Hebraicam veritstem in Isaia scriptum sit: Esiet virga de radice Iesse, et Nazaraeus de radice ejus conscendet (Isai. xi. i.). | English translation: And coming, he dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene. If he had asked for a fixed example from the Scriptures, he would never have said what was said through the prophets; but simply, what was said by the prophet: but now, calling the prophets in the plural, he shows that he did not take the words from the Scriptures, but the sense. A Nazarene, the Spirit interpreted. And all the Scriptures mention the coming of the Holy Lord. We can also say in another way, that even in words, according to the Hebrew truth, it is written in Isaiah: A rod shall come from the root of Jesse, and a Nazarene shall come up from his root. (Isai. xi. i.). Jerome’s Commentary on Matthew.
[ix] Barnes sums up the view of Jesus the Nazarene as one despised in four points: 1. He does not say “by the prophet,” as in Matthew 1:22; Matthew 2:5, Matthew 2:15, but “by the prophets,” meaning no one particularly, but the general character of the prophecies. 2. The leading and most prominent prophecies respecting him were, that he was to be of humble life; to be despised and rejected. 3. The phrase “he shall be called” means the same as he shall be. 4. The character of the people of Nazareth was such that they were proverbially despised and contemned, John 1:46; John 7:52. To come from Nazareth, therefore, or to be a Nazarene, was the same as to be despised, or to be esteemed of low birth; to be a root out of dry ground, having no form or comeliness. This was what had been predicted by all the prophets.

Thursday, June 17, 2021

Scrivener’s “Preface” to the 1881 New Testament

References to the New Testament Greek Textus Receptus Bible edited by F. H. A. Scrivener often appear in the Bible Versions Debate. It seems to me that both sides often portray Scrivener and/or the edition as something they are not. I have read a KJVO rate Scrivener as near the top of KJVO advocates. I have read an anti-KJVO act as if Scrivener took the King James Bible and back translated it into Greek to create The New Testament in the Original Greek, according to the Text Followed by the Authorised Version. Both beliefs are basted in baloney butter. In contrast, I post here the “Preface” of The New Testament in the Original Greek so that you may read it for yourself and come to some of your own conclusions.

PREFACE.

 The special design of this volume is to place clearly before the reader the variations from the Greek text represented by the Authorised Version of the New Testament which have been embodied in the Revised Version. One of the Rules laid down for the guidance of the Revisers by a Committee appointed by the Convocation of Canterbury was to the effect “that, when the Text adopted differs from that from which the Authorised Version was made, the alteration be indicated in the margin.” As it was found that a literal observance of this direction would often crowd and obscure the margin of the Revised Version, the Revisers judged that its purpose might be better carried out in another manner. They therefore communicated to the Oxford and Cambridge University Presses a full and carefully corrected list of the readings adopted which are at variance with the readings “presumed to underlie the Authorised Version,” in order that they might be published independently in some shape or other. The University Presses have accordingly undertaken to print them in connexion with complete Greek texts of the New Testament. The responsibility of the Revisers does not of course extend beyond the list which they have furnished.

The form here chosen has been thought by the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press to be at once the most convenient in itself, and the best fitted for giving a true representation of the Revisers’ work. In their Preface the Revisers explain that it did not fall within their province to construct a continuous and complete Greek text. Wherever a variation in the Greek was of such a nature that it could properly affect the English rendering, they had to decide between the competing readings: but in most other cases they refrained from spending time on work not needed for the purposes of an English translation. It was therefore impossible to print a continuous Greek text which should include the readings certified as adopted by the Revisers, without borrowing all the intervening portions from some printed text which had not undergone their revision, and in which, to judge by analogy, they would doubtless have found many readings to disapprove. It is true that all variations in this unrevised part of the text must from the nature of the case be comparatively unimportant: but they include many differences of order and grammatical form expressive of shades and modifications of meaning which no careful reader would neglect in studying the Greek original. The Cambridge Press has therefore judged it best to set the readings actually adopted by the Revisers at the foot of the page, and to keep the continuous text consistent throughout by making it so far as was possible uniformly representative of the Authorised Version. The publication of an edition formed on this plan appeared to be all the more desirable, inasmuch as the Authorised Version was not a translation of any one Greek text then in existence, and no Greek text intended to reproduce in any way the original of the Authorised Version has ever been printed.

In considering what text had the best right to be regarded as “the text presumed to underlie the Authorised Version,” it was necessary to take into account the composite nature of the Authorised Version, as due to successive revisions of Tyndale’s translation. Tyndale himself followed the second and third editions of Erasmus’s Greek text (1519, 1522). In the revisions of his translation previous to 1611 a partial use was made of other texts; of which ultimately the most influential were the various editions of Beza from 1560 to 1598, if indeed his Latin version of 1556 should not be included. Between 1598 and 1611 no important edition appeared; so that Beza’s fifth and last text of 1598 was more likely than any other to be in the hands of King James’s revisers, and to be accepted by them as the best standard within their reach. It is moreover found on comparison to agree more closely with the Authorised Version than any other Greek text; and accordingly it has been adopted by the Cambridge Press as the primary authority. There are however many places in which the Authorised Version is at variance with Beza’s text; chiefly because it retains language inherited from Tyndale or his successors, which had been founded on the text of other Greek editions. In these cases it is often doubtful how far the revisers of 1611 deliberately preferred a different Greek reading; for their attention was not specially directed to textual variations, and they might not have thought it necessary to weed out every rendering inconsistent with Beza’s text, which might linger among the older and unchanged portions of the version. On the other hand some of the readings followed, though discrepant from Beza’s text, may have seemed to be in a manner sanctioned by him, as he had spoken favourably of them in his notes; and others may have been adopted on independent grounds. These uncertainties do not however affect the present edition, in which the different elements that actually make up the Greek basis of the Authorised Version have an equal right to find a place. Wherever therefore the Authorised renderings agree with other Greek readings which might naturally be known through printed editions to the revisers of 1611 or their predecessors, Beza’s reading has been displaced from the text in favour of the more truly representative reading, the variation from Beza being indicated by *. It was manifestly necessary to accept only Greek authority, though in some places the Authorised Version corresponds but loosely with any form of the Greek original, while it exactly follows the Latin Vulgate. All variations from Beza’s text of 1598, in number about 190, are set down in an Appendix at the end of the volume, together with the authorities on which they respectively rest.

Wherever a Greek reading adopted for the Revised Version differs from the presumed Greek original of the Authorised Version, the reading which it is intended to displace is printed in the text in a thicker type, with a numerical reference to the reading substituted by the Revisers, which bears the same numeral at the foot of the pages. Alternative readings are given in the margin by the Revisers in places “in which, for the present, it would not in their judgement be safe to accept one reading to the absolute exclusion of others,” provided that the differences seemed to be of sufficient interest or importance to deserve notice. These alternative readings, which are more than 400 in number, are distinguished by the notation Marg. or marg. In the Revised Version itself the marginal notes in which a secondary authority is thus given to readings not adopted in the text almost always take the form of statements of evidence, and the amount of evidence in each instance is to a certain extent specified in general terms. No attempt however has in most cases been made to express differences in the nature or the amount of this authority in the record of marginal readings at the foot of the page. For such details the reader will naturally turn to the margin of the Revised Version itself.

The punctuation has proved a source of much anxiety. The Authorised Version as it was originally printed in 1611, rather than as it appears in any later edition, has been taken as a primary guide. Exact reproduction of the English punctuation in the Greek text was however precluded by the differences of grammatical structure between the two languages. It was moreover desirable to punctuate in a manner not inconsistent with the punctuation of the Revised Version, wherever this could be done without inconvenience, as punctuation does not strictly belong to textual variation. Where however the difference of punctuation between the two Versions is incompatible with identical punctuation in the Greek, the stops proper for the Authorised Version are given in the text, with a numerical reference, without change of type, to the other method set forth in the foot-notes. Mere changes in punctuation, not consequent on change of reading, are discriminated from the rest by being set within marks of parenthesis ( ) at the foot of the page. The notes that thus refer exclusively to stops are about 157.

The paragraphs into which the body of the Greek text is here divided are those of the Revised Version, the numerals relating to chapters and verses being banished to the margin. The marks which indicate the beginning of paragraphs in the Authorised Version do not seem to have been inserted with much care, and cease altogether after Acts xx. 36: nor would it have been expedient to create paragraphs in accordance with the traditional chapters. Manifest errors of the press, which often occur in Beza’s New Testament of 1598, have been silently corrected. In all other respects not mentioned already that standard has been closely abided by, save only that, in accord not been represented as part of the speech or quotation which it introduces, and the aspirated forms αὐτοῦ, αὐτο, αὐτόν, &c. have been discarded. In a very few words (e. g. μαργαρίται) the more recent and proper accentuation has been followed. Lastly, where Beza has been inconsistent, the form which appeared the better of the two has been retained consistently: as νηφάλιος not νηφάλεος, οὐκέτι not οὐκ έτι, ἐξαυτῆς not ἐξ αυτῆς, ἵνα τί not ἵνατί, but τὰ νῦν not τὰνῦν, διὰ παντὸς not διὰ παντός, τοῦτ ἔστι not τουτέστι.

ΠΑCΑΓΡΑΦΗΘΕΟΠΝΕΥCΤΟCΚΑΙΩΦΕΛΙΜΟC.

F. H. A. S.

Christmas, 1880.

“Preface,” The New Testament in the Original Greek, according to the Text Followed by the Authorised Version, together with the Variations Adopted in the Revised Version, F. H. A. Scrivener, Editor. Cambridge: University Press, 1881, pp. v-xi

Monday, February 27, 2017

The infallible standard

"Now then, let the laws of Christ embracing all the doctrine which he established, as settled forever by the decisions of the holy apostles, as left on record in the New Testament, be regarded as the infallible standard or test by which the church of Christ is identified, and, it must follow that all who are deficient in these essential and indispensable points are weighed in the balance and found wanting." -- Gilbert Beebe

Saturday, May 04, 2013

A Master Painting by the Master Painter

"God often lays the sum of His amazing providences in very dismal afflictions; as the limner* first puts on the dusky colors, on which he intends to draw the portraiture of some illustrious beauty." -- Stephen Charnock

First, a brief summary of Acts 12
  In the beginning of the chapter:
     Herod is in charge and the church is persecuted.
     James is dead.
     Peter is in prison.

  In the end of the chapter:
     Peter is free.
     Herod is dead.
     God is in control and the word of God spreads.

Acts chapter 12 paints a portrait in the life of the early church. When the painting begins, it looks as if it will be no masterpiece. The wicked ruler Herod finds popularity in persecuting the church of God. He has James (an apostle, the brother of John) executed and then proceeds to arrest Peter. He expected to lavish on Peter the same fate when the Passover season was finished. As Peter languished in jail, the church prayed for him. Suddenly an angel appeared. Peter awoke, his chains fell off and they quickly exited the prison unnoticed. Neither Peter nor the church could believe it, but both rejoiced profusely.

Circumstances change. Guards were executed. Herod went to Caesarea to get away from it all. He finds opportunity to make peace with Tyre and Sidon, and offers a stunning public oratory, of which the people shout, "This is the voice of a god, not of a man." Suddenly Herod is struck down by God and dies. The enemy is defeated. God's providences shine through and the word of God spreads and grows.

Though we watch such portraits painted time after time, too often we forget that it is God who is painting and not Herod. No matter how often it appears that a Herod is having his way, remember it is God who rules and that all things work together for good to them that love God. Let the dusky colors be first put on, only remember there is yet illustrious beauty to come forth!

* a painter

Saturday, June 23, 2012

The use of Old Testament Scripture

...in New Testament times.

The gospel that Paul preached was according to the Old Testament scriptures - I Corinthians 15:1-4.

Philip preached Jesus to the eunuch using the Old Testament scriptures in Isaiah - Acts 8:35.

Paul demonstrated that Jesus was the Christ from the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 17:1-4.

Bereans believed as a result of searching the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 17:10-12.

Apollos convinced Jews in Achaia that Jesus was the Christ using the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 18:28.

The Old Testament scriptures testify of Christ - John 5:29.

The Old Testament scriptures are able to make one wise unto salvation - II Timothy 3:15.

The Old Testament scriptures teach salvation by faith - Romans 4:3; 10:8-11; Galatians 3:8,22; I Peter 2:6.

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

The New Covenant

“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:…And they shall all know Me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more,” (Jeremiah 31:31-34)

The Epistle to the Hebrews contains (in chapters 7-10) the Holy Spirit’s comments upon this great prophecy; prominence being given to the truth that Jesus Christ is “the Surety” of this covenant, as well as “the Mediator” thereof (7:22; 8:6; 12:24); that it has been ratified “by His own blood” (9:12-24; 13:20), and that it is therefore “a better covenant, established upon better promises,” (8:6).

Further it is revealed in those chapters that, when Christ had offered that “one sacrifice for sins forever, and sat down on the right hand of God,” not only was the new covenant put into operation, but the old covenant and all its appointments---people, temple, priesthood, sacrifices, etc.----were forever abolished. Which things in fact were, even in their own era, nothing but ‘a shadow of good things to come,’ (10:1).

Moreover, God had never any pleasure in them, because, “it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.” And surely, as we meditate upon the contents of Hebrews 9 and 10, we must perceive that God would abhor the very thought of setting up again that same system of vain sacrifices and ceremonies, which He abolished at the awful cost of the sacrifice of His own Son, and which had their complete fulfillment in the “one sacrifice for sins forever” offered at Golgotha.
-- By Philip Mauro, as quoted in the Shreveport Grace Church bulletin, October 8, 2006

Tuesday, June 27, 2006

Old Testament Scripture...

...used in New Testament times. Here are some examples.

The gospel that Paul preached was according to the Old Testament scriptures - I Corinthians 15:1-4.


Philip preached Jesus to the eunuch using the Old Testament scriptures in Isaiah - Acts 8:35.


Paul demonstrated that Jesus was the Christ from the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 17:1-4.


Many Bereans believed as a result of searching the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 17:10-12.


Apollos convinced Jews in Achaia that Jesus was the Christ using the Old Testament scriptures - Acts 18:28.


The Old Testament scriptures testify of Christ - John 5:29.


The Old Testament scriptures are able to make one wise unto salvation - II Timothy 3:15.


The Old Testament scriptures teach salvation by faith - Romans 4:3; 10:8-11; Galatians 3:8,22; I Peter 2:6.