“Why I Preach from the Received Text” quotes

Below find 25 quotes by 25 authors from 25 chapters of Why I Preach from the Received Text.

“The Bible teaches that the triune God is the primary author of the Scripture, and he never makes a mistake.” Archibald Allison, p. 27

“There is a sad and distressing discrepancy in the very supposition that no exact superintending or peculiar providence has watched over the inspired books of Scripture and the text contained in those books.” Jonathan Arnold, p. 41

“The purity of God’s words within creation is a testimony of God himself unto his creation.” Doug Barger, p. 51

“God did not donate or reveal his Word into the hands of a group of random secular academics, but he gave it to his Church.” Gavin Beers, p. 57

“The Bible itself teaches that God himself preserves the Scriptures by means of his covenant people…(Romans 3:2)…(I Timothy 3:15)…” Poul de Gier, p. 66

“If the reliability of holy Scripture is in question, we have no solid ground for our faith.” Tanner Dikin, p. 78

“Textual criticism has never been, and never will be, a neutral enterprise carried out by scholars who just want to know the ‘facts.’” William O. Einwechter, p. 88

“It is the written Word of God that is able to search our hearts (Hebrews 4:12), not we who are able to search the hearts of those that copied it.” Brent C. Evans, p. 97

“I was delighted when I received my first copy of the NIV, but was soon disappointed when reading the book of Job. Simply having a modern translation did not make that book any easier to understand!” Philip Gardiner, p. 102

“We can confidently say that no document in the history of the world has been more commented upon, picked through, preached, examined, or critiqued than the Received Text of the Bible via the Authorized Version [of the Bible].” Dane Johannsson, p. 112

“Some argue that no doctrine has been compromised by the differences [between the ‘stable TR’ and ‘unstable Critical Text’ rlv] One could remove the texts of Genesis 1:1 or John 3:16 and argue that no doctrine is compromised when considering the Bible as a whole, but this is unpersuasive.” Howie W. Owen Jones, p. 121

“God never promised to preserve the manuscripts upon which the text was written; rather, he promised to preserve the words. This is an important principle which is too often overlooked.” Trevor Kirkland, p. 126

“In ministry...I had to preach the text, but before I could preach it, I had to be sure what it was.” Brett Mahlen, p. 136

“In his opening salvo, the devil focused his attack on undermining the Word of God and nothing has changed since.” Robert McCurley, p. 143

“…I preach from the Received Text through the Authorized Version.” Christian McShaffrey, p. 160

“In certain respects, the Christian academy has devasted by wicked unbelief parading as scientific objectivity, and the churches have largely followed suit.” D. Scott Meadows, p. 164

“I have found that having a standard, textually stable, theologically faithful, accurate Bible is necessary in a faithful pulpit and evangelism ministry.” Pooyan Mehrshahi, p. 170

“The New King James was being recommended to me as a good translation, so it gave me cause to ask, ‘Why not try the King James Version itself?’ After all, it has stood the test of time...” Mark L. R. Mullins, p. 181

“The Word of God is invincible.” Christopher Myers, p. 185

“If the preaching of the Word was to be at the center of my ministry, I had to have confidence and certainty as to what the Word of God is.” Jeff Riddle. pp. 200-201

“I did not set out to disprove the claims of the modern Critical Text, only to understand them; but as time went on, I became increasingly convinced that the modern Critical Text and the philosophy which undergirded it, was an affront to the honor of God, the glory of Christ, and the good of the Church.” Christopher Sheffield, p. 206

“Surely God’s people want a Bible that they know is God’s Word in its entirety, not one that has parts of its New Testament either excised, or accepted in a qualified fashion.” John Thackway, p. 223

“‘Is this Scripture?’ is a canonical question, whether we are asking it of a book, or even of a particular reading within a canonical book. Under the term canon, we recognize what is (and what is not) authoritative Scripture.” Robert Truelove, p. 225

“I simply do not understand how evangelicals can defend German rationalism and an approach to Scripture that dishonors the sovereign providence of God.” J. D. “Doc” Watson, p. 238

“I became convinced that a significant shift had take place in the doctrine of scripture...No longer was the church serving as the proper curator of holy writ, but this task had been subcontracted out to those who were unorthodox.” Joshua White, pp. 248-249

See my Book Review: Why I Preach from the Received Text.

Worship, by Brian Crossley

When the Creator of heaven and earth performed the final act of creation, it was His pleasure to create man in His own image. In all of creation, it is man alone who has the capacity to see into the depths of space, to marvel at the order and design of the universe, and to delight in the beauty with which God has clothed His creation. As we contemplate the wonders of God’s handiwork, there are two contrasting impressions which are certain to invade our thoughts. On the one hand, we cannot help but be humbled at the awareness of our own insignificance to the creation. On the other hand, as we witness the grandness of His creation, the spirit that is within us simply demands our praise of the God whose Word brought it all into being.

This is the essence of worship – to fall upon our knees in humble adoration of the Most High God, Creator of heaven and earth. This, brethren, is the ultimate reason for which we were created in His own image. There is no higher achievement to which man can attain than to testify of God’s glory, His sovereignty, and His holiness. He, and He alone, is worthy of worship!

Psalm 113:5 “Who is like unto the Lord our God...”

Brian Crossley; As published in The Baptist Waymark, Volume IV, No. 6, Nov-Dec 1996, page 4

Charles Wesley on Psalm XII

Psalm XII. Charles Wesley.

1. Help, O, Lord! the faithful fail,
Scarce a man continues just.
Shall the gates of hell prevail?
Shall the church on earth be lost?

2. Every soul from thee departs,
Bold to cast thy words behind;
Men of double tongues and hearts,
False as hell are all mankind!

3. God shall judge the faithless race,
Bruise them with an iron road,
All who walk in pride abase,
Makes the rebels own their God.

4. “Surely now,” the Lord hath said,
“I will in my might arise,
Bring my needy servants aid,
Answer all their plaintive sighs.

5. “I myself will save th’opprest;
Placed beyond the tyrant’s power,
Satan shall no more molest,
Sin shall never reach him more.”

6. True and faithful is the Lord,
All that he hath spoke shall be;
Pure his every written word,
From the dross of falsehood free.

7. In the earthly furnace tried,
In the soul of fallen man,
Lo! as silver purified
All his promises remain.

8. Thou, O Lord, shalt all fulfill;
Earth and hell a while may rage;
Thou art our Preserver still,
Christ is ours from age to age.

This Wesley metrical setting of Psalm 12 (7s. meter) was published posthumously in 1854, then later added to The Poetical Works of John and Charles Wesley: Reprinted from the Originals...Together with the Poems of Charles Wesley not Before Published, Volume VIII, (G. Osborn, editor. London: Wesleyan-Methodist Conference Office, 1870, pp. 22-23). This publication contains the following explanation:

“First published in 1854, by the Rev. H. Fish, from a MS. in his possession, and inserted with his kind consent.”

We know Wesley wrote this in his lifetime (1707-1788), but do not know what year he wrote it. Wesley makes application of the text in verses 6-7 to the written word, but seems to take the second “preserve them” to be in reference to both God’s promises and his people.

In other words, ballast to umlaut

• ballast, noun. Anything that gives mental, moral, or political stability or steadiness; gravel, broken stone, slag, , etc., placed between and under the ties of a railroad to give stability, provide drainage, and distribute loads.
• beeline, verb. (intransitive) To travel in a straight line; to hurry somewhere by the quickest route possible; to make a beeline to or for someone or something.
• bender, noun. A person or thing that bends, as a pair of pliers or a powered machine; (Slang) a drinking spree.
• birdikin, noun. A little or young bird.
• cabal, noun. A small group of secret plotters, as against a government or person in authority; the plots and schemes of such a group; intrigue.
• distigme (plural, distigmai), noun. A technical term used to text critics to describe certain symbols/ markings (double dots) in the Greek Codex Vaticanus; an umlaut (q.v.).
• emanant, adjective. Issuing or flowing forth; emerging from or as if from a source.
• eminent, adjective. Exhibiting eminence especially in standing above others in some quality or position; prominent; standing out so as to be readily perceived or noted; conspicuous; projecting.
• entente, noun. An arrangement or understanding between two or more nations agreeing to follow a particular policy with regard to affairs of international concern; an alliance of parties to such an understanding.
• fealty, noun. Fidelity; faithfulness; (Historical) fidelity to a lord; the obligation or the engagement to be faithful to a lord, usually sworn to by a vassal.
• flabbergast, verb. (used with object) To overcome with surprise and bewilderment; astound.
• halakic, adjective. Relating to the entire body of Jewish law and tradition comprising the laws of the Bible, the oral law as transcribed in the legal portion of the Talmud, and subsequent legal codes amending or modifying traditional precepts to conform to contemporary conditions.
• hegira (also hejira) noun. Any flight or journey to a more desirable or congenial place.
• imbroglio, noun. Aa misunderstanding, disagreement, etc., of a complicated or bitter nature, as between persons or nations; an intricate and perplexing state of affairs; a complicated or difficult situation.
• immanent, adjective. Remaining within; indwelling; inherent.
• imminent, adjective. Likely to occur at any moment; impending.
• parameter, noun. (in general use) A limit or boundary that defines the scope of a particular process or activity.
• perimeter, noun. The continuous line forming the boundary of a closed geometric figure; the outermost parts or boundary of an area or object.
• poddle, verb. (intransitive) To walk with slow, short, or unsteady steps; to proceed in a dawdling or uncoordinated manner; to waddle, toddle, potter.
• standing O, noun. A standing ovation (an occurrence in which the people at a play, speech, sporting event, etc., stand up and applaud to show enthusiastic approval or appreciation).
• umlaut, noun. (Orthography) A diacritic (¨) used over a vowel, as ä, ö, ü, to indicate a vowel sound different from that of the letter without the diacritic, especially as so used in German.

A Simple Guide to Family Worship, and other links

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the sites linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the specific posts linked.

• A Simple Guide to Family Worship -- “Family worship brings glory to God. God is most glorified when His people value Him above all other things.”
• Are Seminaries Legitimate? A Critical Look at Modern Theological Education -- “It must be said at the outset, that to question the legitimacy of our modern seminaries is not to be equated with the mistaken notion that theological training for church leaders is unnecessary.”
• BillionGraves Eagle Scout Projects: New Record Set -- “Adam Stevenson led his group of volunteers in taking an amazing 59,349 photos!! Adam and his volunteers didn’t just break the record – they shattered it!”
• Can you define “woman”? -- “...either God, the Creator, defines, or has defined, what woman is, or anyone can make up for himself a definition, according to what is right in his own eyes.”
• Greek Language -- “We began with Modern Greek so that we could speak and think in Greek and treat it as a living language. Now for Attic Greek we will follow a similar process to what we began above.”
• How God Works All Things for Good for His People -- “God uses all things—everything in this life, including suffering (Rom. 8:17–18, 23–25)—to accomplish his purpose for us in his grand plan to conform us to his Son and to preserve us until he finally glorifies us.”
• Joel Beeke on Bible Versions: Practical Reasons for Retaining the KJV -- “...the KJV is widely studied and commented on in the literature of biblical scholarship. It will always be a standard of reference and comparison of Bible commentators. All other versions are compared to it, contrasted with it, tested by it.”
• Jordan Peterson Turns the Tables on Hollywood Star Olivia Wilde After She Calls Him the Inspiration for Her New Movie’s Villain -- “Wilde hates Peterson, of course, because he speaks the truth about human nature and biological sex, both of which are things the left wants to overhaul, change, and destroy in favor of its extremist agenda.”
• Okie Road Trip 2019: Visiting Helena, Ark.’s Magnolia Cemetery, Part I -- “Helena was founded in 1833 by Nicholas Rightor and is named after the daughter of Sylvanus Phillips, an early settler of Phillips County and the county’s name sake.”
• The AV Pronoun Debate -- “Resolved: The superior accuracy of its second-person pronouns commends the continued use of the Authorized Version in public reading and preaching. Christian McShaffrey affirms. Mark Ward denies.”
• The Biblical Presuppositions for the Critical Text that Underlie the Modern Versions, Pt. 3 -- “The doctrine of inspiration comes entirely from scripture. The doctrine of preservation should too. We walk by faith, not by sight.”
• The Historical Ages Interpretation of the Churches of Revelation Two and Three -- “ The prophetic interpretation fits neither a Popish nor Protestant view of church history...A severe problem with the prophetic interpretation is that God’s view of church history is neither Papist nor Protestant, but Baptist.”
• The Language of the KJV -- “Some words and idioms may seem archaic to a North American, but they may be very familiar to the British or citizens of other commonwealth nations. There are millions of readers (of trhe KJV) outside of North America.”
• The Providence of God in Preserving Scripture -- “...to assert that the Hebrew and Greek texts of Scripture have been preserved in the same way as any other work of antiquity seems ‘to border on atheism.’”
• The Spirit ITSELF -- “Doug Kutilek and Rick Joyner...have written articles that claim the KJB use of ‘itself’ to refer to the Holy Ghost, or Holy Spirit, is borderline blasphemy.”
• “To Bloom Forever in Heaven”: Exploring Greenville, Ala.’s Pioneer Cemetery -- “These first two monuments are unlike any I have ever seen before and I’m willing to bet you haven’t either. I’ll let you be the judge.”
• What The World Lost: Heart-Wrenching Video Of Liza Fletcher Singing To Her Students Revealed -- “Miss you girls. And you need to let the light shine at your house. And I will see you later.”
• 5 Myths about Preaching -- “Let God’s Word shape your sermons into preaching that is faithful to Scripture and relevant to your hearer.”

Quotable quotes from Martyn Lloyd-Jones

Quotes from David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, who was both a Welsh evangelical minister and a medical doctor. He was long-time pastor of Westminster Chapel in Westminster, London, England.

A very good way of testing any view that you may hold is this one: Is this view humbling to me, glorifying to God? If it is, it is probably right. You won’t go far wrong if whatever view you are holding is glorifying to God, humbling to man.

The true preaching of the gospel of salvation by grace alone always leads to the possibility of this charge [of Antinomianism, rlv] being brought against it.

If your presentation of the Gospel does not expose it to the charge of Antinomianism you are probably not putting it correctly. What do I mean by that? Just this: The Gospel, you see, comes as this free gift of God–irrespective of what man does. Now, the moment you say a thing like that, you are liable to provoke somebody to say, “Well, if that is so it doesn’t matter what I do.” The Apostle takes up that argument more than once in this great epistle. “What then,” he says at the beginning of chapter 6, “shall we do evil–commit sin–that grace might abound?” He’s just been saying: “where sin abounded grace does much more abound.” “Very well,” says someone. “This is a marvelous doctrine, this ‘Go and get drunk, do what you like the grace of God will put you right.’” Antinomianism. Now, this doctrine of the Scriptures–this justification by faith only, this free grace of God in salvation–is always exposed to that charge of Antinomianism. Paul was charged with it. He said, “You know, some people say that’s what I’m preaching.” Paul’s preaching was charged with Antinomianism…So I say, it is a very good test of preaching. You see–what is not evangelical preaching is this: It’s the kind of preaching that says to people, “Now, if you live a good life; if you don’t commit certain sins; and if you do good to others; and if you become a church member and attend regularly and are busy and active you will be a fine Christian and you’ll go to Heaven. That’s the opposite of Evangelical preaching–and it isn’t exposed to the charge of Antinomianism because…it is telling men to save themselves by their good works…And it’s not the Gospel–because the Gospel always exposes itself to this misunderstanding from the standpoint of Antinomianism. So, let all of us test our preaching, our conversation, our talk to others about the Gospel by that particular test…If you don’t make people say things like that sometimes, if you’re not misunderstood and slanderously reported from the standpoint of Antinomianism it’s because you don’t believe the Gospel truly and you don’t preach it truly.

Tyndale’s 1526 Preface

Preface to the 1526 translation of the New Testament, by William Tyndale:

“Give diligence, reader (I exhort thee) that thou come with a pure mind, and, as the Scripture saith, with a single eye, unto the words of health and of eternal life, by the which (if we repent and believe them) we are born anew, created afresh, and enjoy the fruits of the blood of Christ. Which blood crieth not for vengeance, as the blood of Abel, but hath purchased life, love, favor, grace, blessing, and whatsoever is promised in the Scriptures, to them that believe and obey God, and standeth between us and wrath, vengeance, curse, and whatsoever the Scripture threateneth against the unbelievers and disobedient, which resist, and consent not in their hearts to the law of God, that it is right, holy, just, and ought so to be.

“Mark the plain and manifest places of the Scriptures, and in doubtful places see thou add no interpretation contrary to them; but (as Paul saith) let all be conformable and agreeing to the faith.

“Note the difference of the Law and of the Gospel. The one asketh and requireth, the other pardoneth and forgiveth. The one threateneth, the other promiseth all good things to them that set their trust in Christ only. The gospel signifieth glad tidings, and is nothing but the promises of good things. All is not gospel that is written in the gospel book: for if the law were away, thou couldest not know what the gospel meant, even as thou couldest not see pardon, favor, and grace except the law rebuked thee, and declared unto thee thy sin, misdeed, and trespass.

“Repent and believe the gospel, as saith Christ in the first of Mark. Apply alway the Law to thy deeds, whether thou find lust [i.e. eager desire, rlv] in the bottom of thine heart to the law-ward, and so shalt thou no doubt repent, and feel in thyself a certain sorrow, pain, and grief to thine heart, because thou canst not with full lust do the deeds of the law. Apply the gospel—that is to say the promises—unto the deserving of Christ, and to the mercy of God and his truth, and so shalt thou not despair, but shall feel God as a kind and a merciful father. And his spirit shall dwell in thee, and shall be strong in thee, and the promises shall be given thee at the last (though not by and by, lest thou shouldest forget thyself, and be negligent) and all threatenings shall be forgiven thee for Christ’s blood’s sake—to whom commit thyself altogether—without respect either of thy good deeds or of thy bad.

“Them that are learned Christianly I beseech—forasmuch as I am sure, and my conscience beareth me record, that of a pure intent, singly and faithfully I have interpreted it, as far forth as God gave me the gift of knowledge and understanding—that the rudeness of the work now at the first time offend them not, but that they consider how that I had no man to counterfeit, neither was helped with English of any that had interpreted the same or such like things in the Scripture beforetime. Moreover, even very necessity and cumbrance (God is record) above strength—which I will not rehearse, lest we should seem to boast ourselves—caused that many things are lacking which necessarily are required. Count it as a thing not having his full shape, but as it were born before his time, even as a thing begun rather than finished. In time to come (if God have appointed us thereunto) we will give it his full shape, and put out if aught be added superfluously, and add to if aught be overseen through negligence, and will enforce to bring to compendiousness that which is now translated at the length, and to give light where it is required, and to seek in certain places more proper English, and with a table to expound the words which are not commonly used and show how the Scripture useth many words which are otherwise understood of the common people, and to help with a declaration where one tongue taketh not another; and will endeavor ourselves, as it were, to seethe it better, and to make it more apt for the weak stomachs; desiring them that are learned and able, to remember their duty, and to help thereunto, and to bestow unto the edifying of Christ’s body (which is the congregation of them that believe) those gifts which they have received of God for the same purpose. The grace that cometh of Christ be with them that love him.

“Pray for us.”

The First Printed English New Testament: translated by William Tyndale

Behind the Pine Curtain

“That sounds like home to me sounds like home to me, like where I want to be.”

“The people who live in the pine woods of Eastern Texas are very primitive in their habits. As this was the first part of Texas that was settled by the early pioneers, their descendants form the principal part of the population ..... You often find grown men and women that have never seen a prairie country, mountain or valley, railroad or steamboat. They grow to manhood and womanhood in the heart of the thick pine woods, and are contented and happy in their log cabins.

“Their diets would by no means please the stomach of an epicure. Cornbread, bacon and potatoes, with an occasional treat of venison, give them perfect satisfaction. Nearly all the children born and reared in the pine woods have light hair; it is rare to see a black-haired family.”

Attributed to: John A. Caplan, “The Sunny South,” November 5, 1887 (On Traces of Texas, Facebook)

The great fundamental of a Baptist church, and other quotes

The posting of quotes by human authors does not constitute agreement with either the quotes or their sources. (I try to confirm the sources that I give, but may miss on occasion; please verify if possible.)

“The great fundamental of a Baptist church is not freedom but obedience. Our freedom is to believe as God pleases, and that alone.” -- Earle V. Pierce

“The real enemies of Israel were the Betweenites: Found neither with the enemies against Israel nor with the armies fighting for Israel.” -- Charles Haddon Spurgeon (this may be a misattribution; I have not yet found a source for this in Spurgeon)

“The question is not whether God has preserved his word. The question is where.” -- David Reid

“Some things are of that nature as to make one’s fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache.” -- John Bunyan

“All I am and have on the altar is in response to all Christ is and did on the cross.” -- Armen Thomassion

“The preservation of ancient manuscripts and the preservation of the words of God are not the same thing. God promised to preserve His words, not manuscripts.” -- Steven Hayes

“There’s never been a ‘fountain of youth,’ but in the Gospel there is a ‘fountain of grace,’ and it’s deeper and sweeter than every need we have.” -- Scotty Smith

“Some people could be given an entire field of roses and only see the thorns in it.” -- Amy Weatherly

“The traditional text of the Bible has a pedigree that goes beyond the latest tweet.” -- Dane Jóhannsson

“Six feet of earth make all men equal.” -- Italian Proverb

“Death is the great leveller. The worm has no respect for knighthood or nobility. The mighty monarch and the slave, find common bed within the grave.” -- Charles H. Spurgeon

“The law, that ‘came by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ,’ John i. 17— a new volume of truths, which had not been true, if he by his blood had not made them so.” -- Thomas Goodwin

Ephesians 2:20 and preservation of the Scriptures

Ephesians 2:20 and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

I apply the meaning of Ephesians 2:20 to the preservation of Scripture, and so have others. The foundation of New Testament Christianity rests on the writings of the apostles and prophets who represent the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord who preserves the churches preserves this foundation of it (e.g., Matthew 16:18). We no longer have apostles and prophets, but their teachings are preserved in the Scriptures and are our sole rule of faith and practice.

“Learn here...that nothing is to be regarded as a fundamental part of the Christian system, or as binding on the conscience, which cannot be found in the ‘prophets and apostles;’ that is, as it means here, in the Holy Scriptures.” -- Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

“Since apostles and prophets were both groups with a teaching role, it seems clear that what constitutes the church’s foundation is neither their person nor their office but their instruction. In practical terms this means that the church is built on the New Testament Scriptures.” -- John R. W. Stott, The Message of Ephesians: God’s New Society, Downer’s Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1979, pp. 106-107

“When he says the foundation, he is talking about the revelation the apostles and the prophets were given which they gave to us in its written form. That is called the New Testament.” -- Ephesians 2:19-22 by Wayne Barber

Israel was succoured by the law, a written covenant. However, in their existence as a visible nation, they also depended on their being the progeny of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were ordered by a succession of the priests from Aaron, (and, later, also a succession of kings), and were planted in a geographical location given them by God. In contrast, the church is a spiritual creature of the word, built on the revelation of Jesus Christ and kept by it (Matthew 16:18). The local churches are visible, but as a kingdom, this nation (Matthew 21:43) does not have geographical borders (John 18:36), ancestral lines according to the flesh (Galatians 3:28-29), or hereditary offices (1 Peter 2:5-9). To lose the word is to lose the church. According to God’s promise and providence, both have been preserved. Bible succession is a necessary part of the Lord keeping his promise of Matthew 28:18-20, as well as for the church to fulfill the commission of Matthew 28:18-20, “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.”

Thou shalt keep the Scriptures

A writer before Benjamin Wilkinson uses Psalm 12:6-7 as a proof-text concerning the Scriptures, contrary to the collected wisdom of the anti-KJVO movement.

Need I make any comment on these passages [i.e., the 6 passages of Scripture he is discussing, rlv]? Surely they assert themselves: for “the words of Jehovah are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Jehovah, Thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.”1 For “the law,” or “doctrine” (margin), “of Jehovah is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of Jehovah is sure, making wise the simple.”2

1 Psalm xii. 6, 7.
2 Psalm xix. 7

Outlines of Prophetic Truth, Robert Brown (of Barton-upon-Humber), London: S. W. Partridge and Co., 1890, pp. 155-56. I am not sure, but this author might be Robert Brown (1844-1912), solicitor and philologist, who lived at Barton-upon-Humber. However, I have not found any source that connects him directly to this work.

An incomprehensible Creator and a comprehensible idol

We have to choose whether we will accept the biblical doctrine of Scripture as it stands or permit ourselves to refashion it according to our fancy. We have to choose whether to embrace the delusion that human creatures are competent to judge and find fault with the words of their Creator or whether to recognize this idea for the blasphemy that it is and drop it. We have to decide whether to carry through our repentance on the intellectual level or whether we shall still cherish our sinful craving for a thought-life free from the rule of God. We have to decide whether to say that we believe the Bible and mean it or to say it and look for ways whereby we can say it without having to accept all the consequences.

If the human mind is set up as the measure and test of truth, it will quickly substitute for man’s incomprehensible Creator a comprehensible idol fashioned in man’s own image; man wants a god he can manage and feel comfortable with and will inevitably invent one if allowed. He will forget (because he cannot understand) the infinite gulf that separates the Creator from his creatures and will picture to himself a god wholly involved in this world and wholly comprehensible (in principle, at any rate) by the speculative intellect. It was no accident but a natural development that made the liberal theology of the nineteenth century so strongly pantheistic. Once people reverse the proper relationship between Scripture and their own thinking and start judging biblical statements about God by their private ideas about God, instead of vice versa, their knowledge of the Creator is in eminent danger of perishing and with it the whole idea of supernatural religion.

J. I. Packer, “Fundamentalism” and the Word of God: Some Evangelical Principles, 1958, pp. 170-171.

Luther’s metrical Psalm 12

Above are stanzas 5 and 6 (in German) from a hymn by Martin Luther on Psalm 12, beginning in the first stanza “Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein” (Oh God, from heaven look down). This hymn was first published in Etlich Christlich lider (Achtliederbuch, or “Eight-Song Book”) in Wittenberg in 1524.

The silver seven times tried is pure
From all adulteration;
So, through God’s Word, shall men endure
Each trial and temptation:
Its worth gleams brighter through the cross,
And purified from human dross,
It shines through every nation.

Thy truth thou wilt preserve, O Lord, 

Pure from their artful glozing, 

Oh! make us lean upon thy Word, 

With hearts unmov’d reposing;

Though bad men triumph and their crew

Are gather’d round, the faithful few

With crafty toils enclosing.

Translated by Frances E. Cox, 1841.

Four lines in German: Das wollst du, Gott, bewahren rein ßor diesem argen Gschlechte, Und laß uns dir besohlen sein, Daß sichs in uns nicht slechte.

Possible non-metrical translation: May you, O God, keep it pure from this evil, and let us be under your command that it not turn evil in us.

It seems reasonable that most translators of this hymn took Luther to be speaking of the Scriptures (or at least words and not people, in the first part). Here are some other examples:

Fry, 1845

Behold the Word of God shall stand
Unchanged, unchanging still,
Whilst the vicissitudes of time
Their destined course, fulfill…

R. Massie, 1854

O God, preserve it pure and free
From this world’s generation,
And let us be preserved by Thee
From all contamination…

Winkworth, 1863

Therefore, O God, preserve it pure
From all that would abuse it,
And in the Faith our hearts secure,
That we may never lose it...

G. Macdonald, 1867

God will its purity defend,
From all this folk besotted,
Our hearts to thee we could commend,
Lest it in us be spotted.

Two other older hymns may be translations of this hymn by Luther, but I am not certain. Here are those:

Miles Coverdale, 1539

O Lorde defende thou them therfore,

And preserve us graciously

From this generacyon evermore,

That persecute us so cruelly…

Gude and Godlie Ballatis, 1567

And Goddis word and promit

Is trewar, cleirar, and mair pure

Than siluer seuin tymes purifyit:

Sen that thow are in word sa sure,

Thow saif vs from sic sort of men,

And fra the doctrine that they ken.

Eternallie on us tak cure.

The Free Lutheran Chorale-Book uses this composite translation:

Preserve Thy Word e’er pure and free
From this vile generation,
And keep us subject unto Thee,
Safe from their infiltration.
The godless ev’rywhere abound,
Where’er such wicked men are found
Exalted midst Thy people.

A critic of the sacred book

From “The Progress of Error” by William Cowper

And of all arts sagacious dupes invent,
To cheat themselves and gain the world’s assent,
The worst is–Scripture warp’d from its intent...

A critic on the sacred book should be
Candid and learn’d, dispassionate and free;
Free from the wayward bias bigots feel,
From fancy’s influence, and intemperate zeal...

Whatever shocks or gives the least offence
To virtue, delicacy, truth, or sense
(Try the criterion, ’tis a faithful guide),
Nor has, nor can have, Scripture on its side.

Journal Jots on KJVO

The two following briefs come from Canadian newspapers in the 1950s. The first is excerpted from an article about some ordinations in the United Church of Canada. The quote below is relative to the discussion of a “basic crisis in Christian education.” A certain “reverend” objected to churches relying too much on the King James Bible. He seems to anticipate Mark Ward’s viewpoint that King James is like a foreign language.

“Earlier, Rev. Charles Pelletier of St. Hyacinthe, said he was worried about the extent to which the churches used the King James version of the Bible, ‘adopting the medieval church attitude of teaching in a foreign language.’ He urged, instead, the use of the revised standard version which had more modern language.”

“7 Ordained, Told Job ‘Thrilling’,” The Montreal Star, Thursday, June 2, 1955, p. 6 (This was in the United Church of Canada)

The second is a letter in reply to F. J. McNey, an atheist in Craigmyle, Starland County, Alberta, Canada, who seemed to enjoy sending letters to “The Voice of the People” column, questioning Christianity and the Bible. Mrs. M. Watson (possibly this person) writes to advise looking in the King James Bible – “the only Bible God has kept perfect all down through the ages.” So here we have some unknown lady in a small village in Starland County, Alberta, Canada in 1951 who is “King James Only.” Sure, she might have been Benjamin Wilkinson’s niece or J. J. Ray’s cousin, but I seriously doubt it!

“Dear Sir—In Answer to F. J. McNey’s remarks in the Voice column, I would ask ‘Have you a King James Bible, the only Bible God has kept perfect all down through the ages?’
“Morrin. Mrs. M. Watson.”

“King James Version,” The Beiseker Times (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada) Friday, April 27, 1951, p. 2 [Note: Morrin is a community in central Alberta, north and east of Calgary.]

“We” do not know

I have on a few occasions quoted a leading New Testament scholar, Dan Wallace, (e.g., here and here) on his doubts about ever knowing “exactly what the authors of the New Testament wrote” (see below). Many others have quoted him as well. I think this is so shocking because it comes from a person who conservative Christians in the United States usually perceive as an evangelical scholar at a conservative theological institution. Perhaps. However, the concept cannot be shocking because it is new. It is not new! It follows, and perhaps adapts, the views of noted scholars who came before him. A few quotations below (which might be multiplied exponentially if other text critics were cited) trace the same kind of view across the 20th century into the 21st. [I have used bold italics to emphasize portions of the quotes. This is not in the original texts.]

Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare (1856-1924), Professor of Theology at the University of Oxford

“[Burgon] would not—perhaps could not, so dense was the veil of prejudice with which the old theory of inspiration covered his eyes—see that prior to the collection of the gospels in a canon, about the year 180, and while they were still circulating singly in isolated churches, their text was less fixed and more liable to changes, doctrinal and transcriptional, than they ever were afterwards; and that the ultimate text, if there was ever one that deserves to be so called, is forever irrecoverable.” (History of New Testament Criticism, F. C. Conybeare. London: Watts and Co., 1910, p. 129.)

Kirsopp Lake (1872-1946), Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Harvard Divinity School

“In spite of the claims of Westcott and Hort and of von Soden, we do not know the original form of the Gospels, and it is quite likely that we never shall. We can, however, reconstruct many of the various states through which it has passed between the third century and the invention of printing. (“Preface,” Family 13 (The Ferrar Group): The Text According to Mark with a Collation of Codex 28 of the Gospels, Studies and Documents Edited by Kirsopp Lake and Silva Lake, XI, Kirsopp and Silva Lake. London: Christophers; Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1941, p. vii.)

Robert McQueen Grant (1917-2014), Professor of New Testament at the University of Chicago

“The primary goal of New Testament textual study remains the recovery of what the New Testament writers wrote. We have already suggested that to achieve this goal is wellnigh impossible. Therefore we must be content with what Reinhold Niebuhr and others have called, in other contexts, an ‘impossible possibility’.” (A Historical Introduction to the New Testament, R. M. Grant. New York, NY: Harper & Row, 1963, p. 51.)

Daniel Baird Wallace (1952-), Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary

“We do not now have—in our critical Greek texts or any translations—exactly what the authors of the New Testament wrote. Even if we did, we would not know it. There are many, many places in which the text of the New Testament is uncertain.” (“Foreword,” Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism, Elijah Hixson & Peter Gurry. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2019, p. xii.)

Wallace recommends avoiding the extremes of “radical skepticism” and “absolute certainty” in order to “land between these two extremes.”

The extract from Conybeare easily identifies him as one who rejected the verbal inspiration of the Bible. Kirsopp Lake’s son notes that Lake was an early doubter of Christianity, writing, “It was, I believe at this point [the years of his curacy at St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford, 1897-1904; rlv] that my father began to doubt the teachings of the church and to think in terms of history and exegesis rather than theology and parish difficulties.” (Quantulacumque, Studies Presented to Kirsopp Lake by Pupils, Colleagues and Friends, Robert Pierce Casey; Silva Tipple Lake; Agnes K. Lake; editors. London: Christophers, 1937, p. vii) Lake himself describes Christianity as a synthesized religion and a “sacramental cult.”

“It is becoming increasingly certain that Christianity in the first century achieved a synthesis between the Greco-Oriental and the Jewish religions in the Roman Empire. The preaching of repentance, and of the Kingdom of God begun by Jesus passed into the sacramental cult of the Lord Jesus Christ. But the details are complex and obscure. What were the exact elements in this synthesis? How was it effected?” (The Beginnings of Christianity: Part I: the Acts of the Apostles, Vol. I, F. J. Foakes Jackson, Kirsopp Lake, editors. London, MacMillan and Co., Ltd., 1942, p. vii.)

I am not familiar with Grant and his theology. I do not know much about Wallace beyond his academic career. I saw on one web page that he was ordained a Baptist minister in 1986 – I do not know if that is accurate. He identifies as an evangelical, has served as president of the Evangelical Theological Society, and is involved in the NET and NIV translations of the Bible.

Who is Naughty and Nice

Yesterday I posted about the “Pick-a-Bible” syndrome and its relationship to a post-truth society. Today I consider the “naughty vs. nice” method of deciding who is right on religious matters (e.g., re faith and practice). In a post-truth feelings-based society, it becomes natural to turn to how nice a person is in order to decide who is right. How do you feel about that person? If a person is “not nice,” then the “truth” presented by that person is probably wrong. If a person is “nice,” then the “truth” presented by that person is probably right. Kent Brandenburg considers this in his The Who-Is-Nicer or Who-Is-Meaner Argument for the Text of Scripture blog post. Not only are “deciders” using the “nice” criteria, but also “debaters” are putting it out there to help the “deciders” decide. Kent wrote, “I wish there was a moratorium on mentioning it [the “style” and “tone” of argumentation, rlv]. Just leave it alone and continue the debate.” This is a discussion we Christians shouldn’t have to have, but nevertheless need to have.

We all could be kinder, nicer, love more, forgive more. I believe that. However, how “nice” we are does not mean we are correct when we speak about the Bible, salvation, or any number of theological issues. God’s transcendent truth decides right and wrong, good and evil – not how we feel about it, or how we feel about the persons presenting it.

Furthermore, this is not an issue of one side is always nice and the other side is always naughty (i.e., mean, mean-spirited).[i] Both sides in the Bible versions debate can be both nice and mean. It is a matter of how the different sides approach this, their “style.” The “fundamental” side (and KJVO in Bible version debates) tends to express their meanness plainly without any façade.[ii] The “neo-conservative” side (and MVO in Bible version debates) tends to dress up their meanness in “nice clothes” so we can focus on the clothes instead of the meanness. This is especially noticeable to me because I have worked part of my life in construction, where strong men may get mad and express it forcefully; and part of my life in education, where you seldom see much of the in-your-face mean and nasty stuff. Instead it is more likely “stab you in the back with one hand while shaking your hand with the other” – all the while keeping a bright smile on the face, being quite “nice.” There is something better about the severe blow that you can see coming from someone you know is mean, as opposed to the sucker punch that is about to blindside you from someone whom you thought was nice![iii]

This “nice equals right” mentality rises from secular, saccharine, and silly views of what “nice” is. In support of this – or because of it – both secularists and people called Christians have recreated Jesus in their own image of “nice.” The Jesus of the Bible tells us to turn the other cheek. The Jesus of the Bible also turns over the tables of the moneychangers. The Jesus of the Bible tells us to speak the truth. The Jesus of the Bible also calls people hypocrites, serpents, and vipers. I have a feeling some people need to reassess the concept of Jesus that they have installed in their minds.

“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” John 17:17

“Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.” Psalm 119:160

“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth…” John 14:6

“…yea, let God be true, but every man a liar…” Romans 3:4

---

[i] Is “arrogant and condescending” better than “mean and nasty”? No. However, it is often easier to weasel out of what you said in an “arrogant and condescending” way – “I didn’t mean it that way.” That malarkey is easier to sell to the foolish than claiming you didn’t mean something you said in a “mean and nasty” way.
[ii] Perhaps this is a general trait of “Fightin’ Fundamentalism.” Additionally, too many King James supporters have drunk from the fountain of Peter Ruckman’s nastiness. I lived 60-something years of my life without owning or reading any of his works, except one small pamphlet on segregation that another preacher gave me years ago. Last year I decided I might not be as knowledgeable as I should be on the KJV debate issues without actually reading something Ruckman wrote, so I ordered a couple of his books. If the rest of his books are anything like those, they could be edited down to about half size by taking out all the bombast about how wrong everyone is except him.
[iii] Example: “I’m going to guess you can’t read the original Bible languages,” by a guy who might not be able to read them in the way regular folks think folks mean when they say they can read something.

The “Pick-a-Bible” mentality

Many people say we are living in a post-truth society. I am not sure I even understand exactly what that means. According to Dictionary.com, “post-truth” is an adjective meaning, “relating to or existing in an environment in which facts are viewed as irrelevant, or less important than personal beliefs and opinions, and emotional appeals are used to influence public opinion.” This definition is applicable to what we see – one’s personal beliefs and feelings supplant absolute truth. Truth is not transcendent, but rather related to and defined by the culture.

How unlike post-truth culture Christians should be! How like post-truth culture contemporary Christians are! The modern “Pick-a-Bible” mentality fits well into this mindset and structure. I recently listened to a guy named Matt Baker on a YouTube channel called UsefulCharts. He said:

Anyone doing serious Bible should never rely on just one translation. It is always best to compare several different versions.[i]

Such statements can be multiplied many times over – many of them made by much more well known Christian teachers. This quote simply happened to be the most recent in my hearing. This reminds me of the adage that someone with two watches never knows what time it is.[ii] The adage refers to the problem of having too much conflicting information. This saying has been loaded in all sorts of spin cycles, with the resulting “wisdom” based on what setting is used by the one loading for spin. Yes, it is possible that the one watch you have is not correct. Nevertheless, it is very true that the more watches you wear the less certainty you have about what time it is, when they send conflicting information.

Interestingly, there is a “Coordinated Universal Time” (or UTC).[iii] UTC is a closely synchronized (coordinated) time standard by which the world regulates clocks and time. Government clocks and personal wristwatches all find a standard in UTC. There is objective truth. It may be “5 o’clock somewhere” but people do not get to govern what time it is by saying what time they feel it is in their hearts! Somehow, we have ditched such a standard in theology, and there is no standard in Christianity. Every man does that which is right in his own eyes.

---

[i] I know nothing of Matt Baker, but was reviewing some Bible history which he was presenting. In his talk, he said he uses the NRSV New Testament because “it’s very ecumenical and the one that most academics use.” I am suspect of the NRSV being “the one that most academics use” but his statement is certainly liberal leaning.
[ii] In this form – “A man with one watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure” – it is often known as Segal’s Law. Someone wrongly credited the saying to Lee Segall of Dallas, Texas, and it was later thus attributed in print with a misspelling, Segal’s (sic) Law. It seems to have actually originated in the San Diego (California) Union newspaper, September 20, 1930 in this way: “Confusion.—Retail jewelers assert that every man should carry two watches. But a man with one watch knows what time it is, and a man with two watches could never be sure.” It can be seem widely quoted in other newspapers after this, with credit to the San Diego – which seems to support this as the earliest source.
[iii] Some of us in older generations knew UTC as Greenwich Mean Time, but that is no longer the terminology used.

California Appeals Court, and other links

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the sites linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the specific posts linked.

• California Appeals Court Overturns $300K In Fines Against Church Over COVID Non-Compliance -- “Pastor Mike McClure said following a December hearing. ‘But there’s a bigger law. I have to get told, you follow God or you follow man. I have to follow what God’s word says.’”
• Chapter 1 - Of the Holy Scriptures -- “There is no infallible authority of Church councils or creeds which have the right to teach against those truths most clearly taught by Scripture. The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself.”
• Evangelical Catholicity and How To Foster It -- “Rancor and division abound...Compare that to the New Testament, where the churches regularly greeted one another (Rom. 16:16, 1 Cor. 16:19), shared preachers and missionaries (2 Cor. 8:18, 3 John 5-6), supported one another financially (Rom. 15:25-26, 2 Cor. 8:1-2; 9:12), and prayed for one another (Eph. 6:18).”
• From Innovation to Laughable Derelict: 8-Track Tapes -- “The popularity of the 8-track tape was relatively short from 1968-1975. There were problems...”
• Further Details in Psalm 12:6-7 Elucidating the Preservation of God’s Words -- “When Jesus said that no man shall pluck ‘them’ out of his hand (John 10:28), with a similar understanding of preservation, you could take that as no man shall pluck 93 to 98 percent of them out of his hand.”
• How the Holy Bible Came to Be -- “Can you imagine a humble farmhand knowing the Bible better than an ordained priest? Erasmus did and so did Tyndale. That is why they were so ardent in their efforts to get God’s Word into the hands of God’s people.”
• Mt. Airy Presbyterian Church, Habersham County, Georgia, Org. 1906 -- “Mt. Airy Presbyterian is a jewel of a church building located in the North Georgia foothills of Habersham County. It was completed in 1907...”
• Notes on Hermeneutics 3 -- “A different Greek text accounts for thousands of changes in the modern versions. It is shorter than the Reformation Greek text by 2,886 words, which is the equivalent of the omission of the entire books of 1 and 2 Peter.”
• Providential Preservation of Scripture -- “Let us adopt the Christian hypothesis, that the scenes of our Saviour’s life were enacted, and his words spoken, in a given way, and that the several evangelists were inspired of God to record them infallibly...”
• The Lollard Society “...is an international organization of scholars, teachers, and students of the late-medieval Wycliffite reformist movement and its counterpart in Hussite Bohemia, along with a range of related texts, authors, and cultural currents from the fourteenth through sixteenth centuries.”
• The Lord has Preserved His Word -- “What criterion can the Bible itself suggest for choosing a good version of it? The makings of an answer may be found in what has come to be known as the High Priestly prayer of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 17.”
• The Story of Broken Wharfe -- “The church that met at Broken Wharfe experienced considerable trials during a time of social, political and ecclesiastical unrest.”
• The Who-Is-Nicer or Who-Is-Meaner Argument for the Text of Scripture -- “I wish there was a moratorium on mentioning it. Just leave it alone and continue the debate.”
• Thomas Coke (1747-1814) on I John 5:7 -- “The anti-trinitarian heretic trembles at this passage; it is a thunderstroke to him, of which he well knows the weight...”
• Why Is That Writing Slanted? The Use of Italic Type in the Bible -- “For centuries, those translating the Word of God from the Greek and Hebrew texts have recognised the great responsibility they have in producing accurate versions of the Bible, in which nothing can be added or omitted.
• WM 245: Examining Mark Ward’s Claims on Psalm 12:6-7 and Preservation of Scripture -- “Is it irrational to suggest that the pronouns in v. 7 might be taken in reference to the ‘pure words’ in v. 6?”

The embarrassing ignoring of the embarrassment of riches

In a reply to an ETC blog on the embarrassment of riches, James Snapp, Jr. wrote the following. He makes an excellent point, despite the naysayers pretending it is not so.

“Looking over those particular textual contests where Byz and Alex disagree, it looks to me like the NA28-editors adopted an Alexandrian reading 92% of the time. Which is to say, 92% of the time, when the editors faced a choice between an Alexandrian reading, and the reading found in the vast majority of manuscripts – the bulk of that ‘embarrassment of riches’ – they adopted the Alexandrian reading, and the reading supported by 85% (or more) of that ‘embarrassment of riches’ was rejected.

“What conclusion can be drawn from this, if not that the editors of NA28 very heavily favor the testimony of a relatively small cluster of Alexandrian MSS, and reject the Byzantine readings, when they disagree with the Alexandrian readings, at 92 out of a 100 opportunities?”

Is it not somewhat hypocritical of those text critics who praise and extol the so-called “embarrassment of riches,” then turn around and ignore most of these riches? I say, “Yea.”