We need help to have hope

2 Chronicles 20:1-13.

We need help in order to have hope.

Introduction.

“It came to pass after this also…” Jehoshaphat was a generally good king. He removed the groves and high places, set up judges and adjured them to “judge not for man, but for the LORD.” Negatively Jehoshaphat “joined affinity with Ahab.”1 He even went into battle with him. See 2 Chronicles 18.

• This was a time of desperation for God’s people. (vs. 1-2)

• There was a fear of destruction among God’s people. (v. 3a)

• There was an urgency of yielding by God’s people. (vs. 3b-4)

• On this occasion, Jehoshaphat the king as the nation’s agent, stood before God and the people and prayed. (vs. 5-12)

Jehoshaphat addressed God (vs. 6-12).

• Jehoshaphat reveled in God (v. 6)

o As our God (v. 7), the God of our fathers.

o As the God of the heavens.

o As the God of the nations.

o As the God of all power.

• Jehoshaphat reviewed the past (7-9)

o God drove out the inhabitants of Canaan.

o God came the land to the seed of Abraham.

o God established his sanctuary in the land.

o God delivered them from times of trouble.

• Jehoshaphat revealed the present (10-11)

o People God would not let them destroy want to destroy them.

o These people reward good with evil. Psalm 35:12.

o God, what will you do?

 We have no power.

 We have no plan.

 We have a polestar, a focal point, the person of God himself.

God addressed Jehoshaphat and the nation (v. 14ff).

o Through his prophet

o By the Spirit

o In the midst of the congregation

• Be not afraid or dismayed.

• The battle is not yours, but God’s.

• Stand ye still, and see the salvation of the LORD.

Other verses to note.

• Exodus 14:13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD…

• Psalm 46:10 Be still, and know that I am God…

• 1 Samuel 17:47 And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD’s…

Conclusion. 

The next day Jehoshaphat and the people went forth into the wilderness of Tekoa. The king urged them to believe God and his word through the prophet. Such belief would result in establishment and prosperity. He appointed singers to go out before the army and praise the beauty of holiness, singing “Praise the Lord; for his mercy endureth for ever.” When the singers began to sing, the Lord himself ambushed the opposing army.2 The Ammonites and Moabites turned on the Edomites, and then they turned on each other! 

Application.

We have come to a time of fear and desperation. We have no power. What we perceived as power (Christian majority) has failed us. We plan no plans. Plans of winning the war by electoral politics have failed us. We must realize that we have no power and no plan. Without power and without a plan, be still and know that we still have God, we can still rely on God. He is our God, He is the god of the heavens, he is the God of all nations. “The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all.” (Psalm 103:19)

Psalm 75:7 But God is the judge: he putteth down one, and setteth up another.

__________________________________________________

1 These biblical affinities usually included alliance by marriage (cf. 1 Kings 3:1 and Ezra 9:12-14). Possibly here it includes a promise of marriage of son to daughter. Jehoshaphat’s son Jehoram married Ahab’s daughter (2 Chronicles 21:6).
2 set ambushments (an ambush; מְאָרְבִים; liers in wait) against the Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites.

Living upon Creator fulness

Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation. Habakkuk 3:17-18.

“See, my soul, in the prophet’s example, the blessedness of living above creature enjoyments, by living upon Creator fulness. Here is a sun, which never goes down! Here is a fountain, whose streams can never dry up! He that lives upon creature excellency, will want both food and comfort when that excellency dies, for they must die with it, when the period of its flourishing is over. But the soul that draws all from Jesus, the God of his salvation, will have Jesus and his salvation to live upon, and to be an everlasting source, when nature, in all its varieties, ceases to supply. My soul, what are thy resources for a day of famine? Canst thou join issue with the prophet? If blasting, or mildew, or frost, shall nip the fig-tree of its blossom; both the vine and the olive fail; yea, if the staff of life, as well as the sweets of life, should all be gone; hast thou Jesus to live upon; canst thou rejoice in him, when there is nothing else left to rejoice in; and call him thine, and the God of thy salvation, when none will own thee, and thou hast none beside him to own?

“They say that music upon the waters always sounds best. Be this so or not, yet the melody of the soul is certainly sweetest when nature is out of tune, if the believer can take his harp from the willow, and sing aloud on the tribulated waters of sorrow, to the God of salvation. And this is a song never out of season, but has peculiar joy in the note, when from a new strung heart, the believer sings it of the God of his salvation, and addresses it to the God of his salvation. Blessed Lord Jesus! Give me grace, like the prophet, so to sing and so to triumph, that since, lose what I may, I cannot lose thee, while thy creature comforts remain, I may enjoy them, from enjoying thee in them: and when all are taken away, still, having thee for my portion, may I sing aloud with the prophet, though all earthly enjoyments cease, ‘I will still rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.’”

Robert Hawker (1753-1827)

The base text of the NKJV New Testament

What was the base text of the New King James translation New Testament? A commonly given but ambiguous answer is that they used the text used by the King James translators. Is there a very clear and direct statement about what text or texts the NKJV translators used? The following statement was included in the “Preface” to the 1979 NKJV New Testament (p. v.). (See also.)

“Of greater importance than the beauty of language in the King James Version is the textual base from which that work was translated. The New Testament of the New King James Bible is a useful and accurate revision, based on the traditional Greek text underlying the 1611 edition of the English Bible.”

This statement does not appear in the “Preface” (pp. iii-iv) of the 1982 NKJV Holy Bible (OT & NT) print edition that I own. The statement uses the definite article “the” and singular word “text.” However, that has become open for interpretation in recent defenses of the NKJV. The idea is that the “Preface” intended “the text” as a collective noun standing for all the texts available to the King James translators in 1604-1611.

Question: Did the NKJV editors and translators use the Greek text used by the King James translators, or did they use Greek texts to which the King James translators had access?

It may not be readily apparent what I mean. There is a difference. For what the NKJV is purported to be, it might be expected that in any given place, the NKJV translators would try to use the KJV source for that place. However, many contemporary NKJV supporters vociferously reject such a standard. They must to maintain that the NKJV is a TR-based translation. They argue that the translators should, could, and did use any “Textus Receptus” (traditional) Greek text available to them. (And the same people would generally apply the same idea to the Hebrew Old Testament.) [For more on this, see yesterday’s post, “The Scrivener Text claim and the NKJV.”]

An example from Luke 1:35. If the NKJV translators were merely claiming to draw from any of the texts to which the King James translators had access, then they might say there were using Erasmus or Stephanus to get to their translation without “of thee.” However, if they were claiming to use the text that the King James translators used, then at this point they would have used a text that had the words “εκ σου” (e.g., Beza). Obviously, the King James translators did not here follow a text without “εκ σου” but used one containing those words.

AKJV: And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

NKJV: And the angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born ___ will be called the Son of God.

1894 Scrivener: και αποκριθεις ο αγγελος ειπεν αυτη πνευμα αγιον επελευσεται επι σε και δυναμις υψιστου επισκιασει σοι διο και το γεννωμενον εκ σου αγιον κληθησεται υιος θεου

Beza 1598: καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν αὐτῇ, Πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἐκ σοῦ ἅγιον κληθήσεται, υἱὸς θεοῦ.

Steph 1550: και αποκριθεις ο αγγελος ειπεν αυτη πνευμα αγιον επελευσεται επι σε και δυναμις υψιστου επισκιασει σοι διο και το γεννωμενον ___ αγιον κληθησεται υιος θεου

NAUBS: καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν αὐτῇ, Πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι· διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ___ ἅγιον κληθήσεται, υἱὸς θεοῦ.

RPMT: καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν αὐτῇ, Πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι· διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ___ ἅγιον κληθήσεται, υἱὸς θεοῦ.

The End of Luke 1:35 in the Greek text of Beza

The NET Bible has this comment:

Luke 1:35 tc A few mss (C* Θ ƒ¹ 33 pc) add “by you” here. This looks like a scribal addition to bring symmetry to the first three clauses of the angel’s message (note the second person pronoun in the previous two clauses), and is too poorly supported to be seriously considered as authentic.

The New King James translators agree with the NET translators against the King James translators.

This explanation – the NKJV translators using any Greek TR to which the King James translators might have had access – has become widely popular as a polemic against accusations that the NKJV translators used the Critical Text. However, in the initial wake of the publication of the NKJV, the average reader in the early 1980s was led to believe or at the least assumed that the NKJV was translated at any given point from the same text chosen by the KJV translators in that place. That assumption has had to be nuanced in modern times because the initial claim is in fact not true. It cannot be defended that the New King James translators only used the text used by the King James translators (neither that they never ever used the Critical Text).

The Scrivener Text claim and the NKJV

After meetings held in Chicago, Illinois and Nashville, Tennessee in 1975, and London, England in 1976, it was found that “there was a strong sentiment that the King James Bible should once more be sensitively revised in a way that would retain everything that could be retained of the text and language of that historic translation.” From “A New King James Version,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” Holy Bible, The New King James Version, pp. 1233-35.

In the section “The Translators’ Resources” the following is stated concerning the New Testament:

“While the New Testament scholars were free to consult any available Greek text, and they did so, each agreed to follow the Greek text developed by Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener. This text, originally published by Cambridge University Press, reconstructed as closely as possible the Greek text underlying the King James Version.

“The reasons for the selection of this text were fourfold:

1. “To have followed a text other than this would have been to produce something other than a King James Bible.
2. “There is a growing number of scholars who now recognize that the Byzantine-type text of the Textus Receptus is older than the age of the earliest extant Byzantine manuscripts. New Testament readings once thought to be uniquely Byzantine have been found in the papyri—the oldest extant manuscripts or fragments. Many scholars have come to believe that the Greek text which is the consensus of the majority of manuscripts is more representative of the original autographs of the New Testament. 
3. “While Erasmus, from whose Greek test the Textus Receptus is largely derived, used only a few late manuscripts in the preparation of his work, they were representative of all the Byzantine manuscripts.
4. “The tendency of recent revisers has been to remove words and phrases from the text of Scripture, based on critical studies of the most recently discovered extant manuscripts. In using the Greek text underlying the King James Bible, these words and phrases were retained. And, in those few places where the majority of manuscripts did not support a word or phrase, that fact could best be indicated in a footnote. (The New Testament of the New King James Version shows in its footnotes those places where the major textual traditions differ from the language of the King James Bible.)” “The History of the King James Bible,” pp 1234-1235

“Each scholar worked privately, and recommended changes in the King James text. In his work he used the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (for the Old Testament) or the Scrivener Greek Text (for the New Testament) and a copy of the 1611 King James Version as revised in 1769 (the edition in general use today).” “The Process of Revision,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” p. 1235

“The New King James Version was prepared with the most profound reverence for the Word of God and with deep appreciation of the wise traditions established by the translators of 1611. It was the prayer of the current revisers that the work in which they labored might indeed be, as Dr. Scrivener has said years before, a ‘reverential and well considered revision . . .  retaining the characteristic excellencies’ of the King James Bible.” “The Process of Revision,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” p. 1236

Source: “The History of the King James Bible,” Holy Bible, The New King James Version, Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1982, pp. 1220-1236.

I thought I had in the past read a claim for the NKJV translators using the Scrivener text. This reference is not of some “KJVO” trying to score points, misrepresent the NKJV, or win a debate. This is not only a “non-KJVO” source making the claim – it is printed under the covers in some editions of the New King James Bible by Thomas Nelson Publishers!

In discussions about certain renderings in the New King James translation, some of its defenders (and reporters) have resorted to admitting that in some places that the NKJV translators did not follow the Scrivener text, but were following another text in the Textus Receptus family. (They are forced by the NKJV itself to admit this.)

For example, the “Bible Researcher” site of Michael D. Marlowe states, “In the New Testament, this means that the Greek text followed is the Textus Receptus of the early printed editions of the sixteenth century.” This allows for the NKJV translators translating in any given place from a different text than that used by the King James translators. While this statement conforms to the results of the end product, that was not the original claim of the NKJV editors and publishers.

According to the statements in “The History of the King James Bible,” the translators were not supposed to do this, because “To have followed a text other than this would have been to produce something other than a King James Bible.” This coincides with what I have thought about both the initial claim and end results of the NKJV.

Another source supporting this conclusion is James D. Price, Chairman of the New King James Old Testament translation committee.

“The truth is that the NKJV translators followed exactly the same traditional Greek text that was used by the KJV translators…the exact Greek words followed by the KJV translators did not exist in a single printed edition until the middle of the 19th century when it was published by Oxford Press. Scrivener republished this text in 1894 and again in 1902. His text is currently published by the Trinitarian Bible Society, and this is the text upon which the NKJV was based. The Publisher’s forward to the NKJV states: ‘the Scrivener Greek Text was the basis of the New Testament.’” James D. Price in “The False Witness of G. A. Riplinger’s Death Certificate for the New King James Version” (Price, 10/6/97), p. 16

“The Greek text of the New Testament was the 1894/1902 Textus Receptus edited by F. H. A. Scrivener, and recently reprinted by the Trinitarian Bible Society. The NKJV consistently followed that text, but constant reference also was made to other printed editions of the Greek New Testament and to other authorities; significant textual variants were listed in the footnotes.” James D. Price in King James Onlyism: A New Sect, Singapore: Saik Wah Press, 2006, p. 307

Price indicates that any variants from the Scrivener Greek text should be listed in the footnotes – not found in the text itself. Any “significant changes” were supposed to be translational (Price, p. 308) based on the “optimal equivalence” theory of translation. However, a comparison of Luke 1:35 in both the King James and New King James translations debunks that theory.

Note also that Price makes a similar claim concerning the Old Testament:

“For the New King James Version (NKJV), the Hebrew text of the Old Testament was the 1967/1977 Stuttgart edition of Biblia Hebraica. Constant reference was made to the printed edition of the Hebrew Bible used by the translators of 1611, the second Bomberg edition edited by Jacob ben Chayyim. In those few places where the Bomberg text differed from the Stuttgart edition, the Bomberg edition was followed.” James D. Price in King James Onlyism: A New Sect, p. 307

It is a fair conclusion that both the publishers and editors of the New King James Bible have made certain claims about its textual base that are not consistently or strictly true. Perhaps that was an initial sincere goal that could not be controlled with the large group of 139 “scholars, pastors, and laymen” (52 of them translators) plus “7 consultants, 66 reviewers, 5 editors, and 12 executive reviewers” (Price, p. 308). Perhaps it was more an advertising ploy than an exactly-intended achievable objective. I do not know. However, I can inspect the results.

For an investigation of a specific verse of Scripture, see tomorrow’s The base text of the NKJV New Testament.

Wikipedia is now Woke-ipedia

“Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” I discovered Wikipedia around 2003 and started working as an “editor”. My first attempt at editing began with adding information about Baptists on their “List of Christian denominations” page. Therefore, my working relationship with them has been almost 20 years.

This is a “free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” Because of that, there are negatives. Bad edits are made. On the other hand, very many articles on Wikipedia provide a quick, easy to find, and helpful entry point of research. There can be a wealth of sources in the footnotes, references, resources, and external links. Numerous blog posts I have made at “Seeking the Old Paths” include the words “According to Wikipedia.” However, future posts will not.

It probably happened long long before I noticed it – but “Wikipedia” is now “Woke-ipedia.” Political correctness expelled exactness of encyclopedic entries. Accuracy is sacrificed on the altar of expediency. If you cannot trust an encyclopedia to be accurate, you cannot trust an encyclopedia. You cannot trust Wikipedia – at least you cannot know whether you can trust it.

I discovered this a couple of weeks ago when I wanted to know Rachel Levine’s birth name. Simple. Just check good old Wikipedia. Nope. Wikipedia’s policy excludes giving the “dead-name” of a transgender person. They have to pretend that Richard Levine was born Rachel Levine, regardless of the facts. That’s a no go for me.

Henceforth Wikipedia is a “dead-name” to me. (Perhaps try Conservipedia instead.)

“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, ‘You are mad; you are not like us.’”

Two spiritual truths

Two spiritual truths and their consequence:

There is a God.
You are not Him.
Trust Him.

Cease ye from man

Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of? Isaiah 2:22

God's prophet urges the house of Jacob to trust in God and not man. They had mingled with and counted on other people (v. 6). They heaped up material wealth and accumulated martial power (v. 7). They worshiped in their own ways (vs. 8-9). They trusted in their high towers and fenced walls (v. 15). They savored their flourishing trade and artistic pursuits (v. 16). But when God is exalted they will be brought low (v. 17). Their confidence will turn to fear (vs. 10, 19, 21). "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man." (Psalm 118:8)

No confidence can be placed in men, even the greatest of them (Psalm 118:8-9). Let all be ashamed of such thoughts, for:

Man is temporal, a creature whose origin is outside himself. He has a beginning. The very life and breath that he has comes from God: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Genesis 2:7)  Man as a creature, as well as individual men and women, have a beginning and an ending in the annals of time. Only God is eternal and self-existent (Exodus 3:14). We cannot depend on that which cannot control of the breath of its own nostrils. Our life is so fragile that if the breath of nose and mouth is stopped, the man is dead. Trust (and fear) God -- In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind (Job 12:10) -- rather than man who has no control over it (Matthew 10:28).

Man is mortal, a creature of the material world who is subject to death (Romans 5:12; 6:23). He has an end. We are of few days and full or trouble (Job 14:1). Our life is a fleeting breath which briefly appears and then vanishes (James 4:14). If God but "gather unto himself his spirit and his breath; All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust." (Job 34:14-15) Man who cannot control his being is unfit for the trust of another. Cease from man! -- who only survives on the breath God has loaned him, who is here today and gone tomorrow. Trust in the eternal one who abides forever (Hebrews 7:24).

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
Proverbs 29:25 The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe.
Psalm 125:1 They that trust in the Lord shall be as mount Zion, which cannot be removed, but abideth for ever.

Make Him thy Fear, thy Love, thy Hope,
Thy Confidence and Joy. (Thomas Gibbons, 1769)

Habakkuk 3:17-18

1. Away, my unbelieving fear!
Fear shall in me no more have place;
My Saviour doth not yet appear,
He hides the brightness of his face;
But shall I therefore let him go,
And basely to the tempter yield?
No, in the strength of Jesus, no!
I never will give up my shield.

2. Although the vine its fruit deny,
Although the olive yield no oil,
The withering fig-tree droop and die,
The field elude the tiller's toil,
The empty stall no herd afford,
The flocks be cut off from their place,
Yet will I triumph in the Lord,
The God of my salvation praise.

3. Barren although my soul remain,
And no one bud of grace appear,
No fruit of all my toil and pain,
But desperate wickedness is here;
Although, my gifts and comforts lost,
My blooming hopes cut off I see;
Yet will I in my Saviour trust,
And glory that he died for me.

4. In hope, believing against hope,
Jesus my Lord and God I claim;
Jesus my strength shall lift me up,
Salvation is in Jesu's name;
To me he soon shall bring it nigh;
My soul shall then outstrip the wind,
On wings of love mount up on high,
And leave the world and sin behind.

By Charles Wesley

The Valley of the Shadow

It is appointed unto men once to die. But before we meet that appointment we may on numerous occasions walk through valleys where death casts its foreboding shadow. King David, after he had served his nation 40 years, became sick and died. Many times before death his eyes caught a view of the shadow death cast.

Psalm 23:4 Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

Death due to unintended consequences
David was made to mourn deaths of those from outside his inner circles -- death that had resulted from his actions and decisions. What misery of mind to acknowledge the unintended consequences to the priest Abiathar, "I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy father's house (1 Samuel 22:22)." Uzzah's death before the ark at first angered David. Then he realized his complicity in the matter by not transporting the ark properly (Cf. 2 Samuel 6:8; 1 Chron. 15:2). 

The death of friends and family
The hurt of the death of friends and family is a profoundly deep wound not soon healed. The Bible tells the tale of several such gut-wrenching moments in David's life. The death of his close friend and confidant Jonathan touched him profoundly -- "How are the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! O Jonathan, thou wast slain in thine high places. I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan." The loss of his sons, a baby, Amnon -- especially Absalom  -- was a special burden. "And the king was much moved, and went up to the chamber over the gate, and wept: and as he went, thus he said, O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!" The mournful song of regret pours forth from his tongue in deep anguish.

The imminent death of one's self
From shepherd to soldier to king, David had not a few run-ins with the shadow of death. Out in the wilds herding and defending his father's sheep, he neared the paw of the lion and the bear, and was delivered. 1 Samuel 17:37 "David said moreover, The Lord that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, he will deliver me out of the hand of this Philistine." As a youth in the shadow of a giant who had been a soldier from his youth, David stared into death's shadow and was again delivered. David as soldier in Saul's army conquered the foe time and again. As a fugitive from Saul's regime, as a kingly leader of his armies, as an Absalomic exile from his own throne, and as a scofflaw of the 7th and 8th commandments, David knew the meaning of imminent death and saw the long shadow of its approach, only to see God turn it aside. 1 Samuel 20:3 "And David sware moreover, and said, Thy father certainly knoweth that I have found grace in thine eyes; and he saith, Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved: but truly as the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth, there is but a step between me and death."

Yes, it is appointed unto men once to die. As far as we know, at any given moment, there is but one step between us and death. But if God be with us, there is no cause to fear. Death is the door by which we exit this world and enter the next. 

Psalm 56:11 In God have I put my trust: I will not be afraid what man can do unto me.

For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain!