Translate

Monday, July 15, 2024

Simply preach the word

“We are commissioned to ‘preach the word,’ whether men ‘hear’ it or ‘whether they will forebear’; whether they will ‘endure’ it or whether they will not (Ezk. ii. 5, 7. 2 Tim. iv. 3.). 

“If men will not ‘endure’ or ‘hear,’ we are not to seek for something else which they will endure, but simply to ‘preach the word.’”

“People, to-day, look for ‘results,’ and unless we are able to show some, or to make up some ‘report,’ our work is considered on all hands as a failure. But we have nothing whatever to do with results. What we have to do with in our faithfulness.”  

E. W. Bullinger (1837-1913), Great Cloud of Witnesses: A Series of Papers on Hebrews XI (originally published in 1911), p. 124

Sunday, July 14, 2024

Glorious Is Thy Name

And blessed be his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen. (Psalm 72:19)

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:9-11).

Baylus Benjamin “B.B.” McKinney wrote the words and music to Glorious Is Thy Name. The hymn is 8s.7s. meter with an irregular refrain. It is a paean of praise to the glorious name of our Saviour, Jesus Christ. This represents one of the two genres in which McKinney usually wrote – prayer and praise.

In his younger days, McKinney led music in revivals with well-known Southern Baptist evangelist A. P. “Pink” Durham. Durham persuaded McKinney to attend Southwestern Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas. His secular, musical, and religious education included: Mount Lebanon Academy at Mount Lebanon, Bienville Parish, Louisiana; Louisiana College in Pineville, Louisiana; Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas; the Siegel-Myers Correspondence School of Music, Chicago, Illinois; and the Bush Conservatory of Music in Chicago, Illinois.

B. B. McKinney was known and is remembered for his songwriting, music evangelism, and editorial work. He served as music editor for the Baptist Sunday School Board and edited The Broadman Hymnal, which first appeared in 1940. The Broadman Hymnal was extremely popular in Southern Baptist churches, and even used by other Baptist churches in the South. Its availability in shape notes helped its reception in many places. Though the SBC replaced it with The Baptist Hymnal in 1956, it is still used in a few churches.

B. B. McKinney wrote the words and music for about 180 songs, as well as writing music for other songs. Some were written under pseudonyms, including (and possibly only) Martha Annis, Otto Nellen, and Gene Routh.

The song can be found as No. 57 in Psalms and Hymns and Spiritual Songs, Shape Note Edition, No. 211 (Knoxville, TN: Melody Publications, 2020).

1. Blessed Saviour, we adore thee,
We thy love and grace proclaim;
Thou art mighty, thou art holy,
Glorious is thy matchless name!
 
Refrain:
Glorious (Glorious is thy name, O Lord), 
Glorious (Glorious is thy name, O Lord),
Glorious is thy name, O Lord! (X 2)

2. Great Redeemer, Lord and Master,
Light of all eternal days;
Let the saints of ev’ry nation
Sing thy just and endless praise!
 
3. From the throne of heaven’s glory
To the cross of sin and shame,
Thou didst come to die a ransom,
Guilty sinners to reclaim!
 
4. Come, O come, immortal Saviour,
Come and take thy royal throne;
Come, and reign, and reign forever,
Be the kingdom all thine own!

B. B. McKinney was born July 22, 1886 in Webster Parish, Louisiana, the son of James Calvin McKinney and Martha Annis Heflin. He married Leila Irene Routh in 1918, and they had two sons, Baylus Benjamin McKinney, Jr. and Eugene Calvin McKinney. Leila was a sister of the Baptist preacher E. C. Routh.

McKinney was music editor at the Robert H. Coleman Company, 1918-1935. He taught at Southwestern Seminary in Fort Worth, 1919-1932. In 1935, he became music editor for the Baptist Sunday School Board in Nashville, Tennessee. He was the founding director (1941-1952) of the Church Music Department of the Baptist Sunday School Board. The Handbook to The Baptist Hymnal (p. 406) called him “the archetypal ‘Mr. Southern Baptist Church Music.’”

According to William J. Reynolds, McKinney died September 7, 1952 in a car wreck at Bryson City, North Carolina. He was returning to Nashville from a church music conference in Ridgecrest, North Carolina. McKinney and his wife are buried at the Woodlawn Memorial Park and Mausoleum in Nashville (Davidson County), Tennessee.

Some sources for McKinney include:

  • Handbook to The Baptist Hymnal, Jere V. Adams
  • Hymns of Our Faith, William J. Reynolds
  • I Will Sing the Wondrous Story, David W. Music and Paul A. Richardson

Saturday, July 13, 2024

Thee, you, the resurrection, his resurrection

Acts 26:7b-8 ...For which hope’s sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?

This is one of those verses “you” might miss in a modern translation. Paul begins by addressing Agrippa directly (“thee,” singular, vs. 2-3), but expands to the entire audience (“you,” plural, v. 8; cf. 25:23-27) when he brings up belief in the resurrection of the dead.

“The word ‘you’ is here plural, signifying that Paul here changes from addressing Agrippa only, and here includes all the Jews present, including those Sadducees who denied the doctrine of the future general resurrection of the dead. Paul is leading up to the doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus (v. 23).” Stephen Mills Reynolds, The Purified New Testament, p. 311

Stephen Mills Reynolds was an ordained Presbyterian minister who served on the New International Version Committee on Bible Translation. He also created his own New Testament, which might be considered sort of a “niche” Bible. It takes and promotes the position on the translation of “oinos” in the as grape juice. Reynolds was observant and noted the change in the number of the pronoun in this text. However, he also “ad-libbed” an interpretation, adding the Sadducees to the group gathered to hear Paul. The text only identifies Roman officials.

Acts 25:23 And on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and was entered into the place of hearing, with the chief captains, and principal men of the city ... 26:30 And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them...

Friday, July 12, 2024

Bible related books and sites available online

Some books and sites related to the Bible and early Christian writings (the providing of links is for research purposes not necessarily a recommendation of all the sites linked).

Thursday, July 11, 2024

Acts, some Ephesians and “re”baptism

Acts 19:1-7 Paul finds disciples in Ephesus

Verse 1a: When Apollos had traveled to Corinth, Paul returned to Ephesus (cf. 18:19). 

Verses 1b-2: Paul encounters “certain disciples.” “Acts 19 records the single instance where a group of believers emerged in isolation from authorized churches. In that single case, all of those believers were baptized again.”[i]

 

Doubtless through interaction with these disciples, Paul sees something amiss and asks them a direct question, “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed?” His perception is correct, for the answer shows the understanding of these disciples is defective regarding the Holy Ghost. They had not been instructed; they had “not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.” “since ye believed” suggests Paul regards them as true believers, and at the least that they professed to be believers.

 

Verse 3: Paul follows with a second question, “Unto what then were ye baptized?” “Unto John’s baptism” most likely means that they were baptized “in reference to” John’s baptism rather than that they were baptized by John the Baptist. John himself had taught concerning the Holy Ghost (cf. Matthew 3:11, 16-17; Mark 1:8-11; Luke 3:16, 22). Some have suggested that it was Apollos who baptized these “unto John’s baptism.”[ii] However, when Apollos came to Ephesus, he was already instructed in the way of God “more perfectly” by Aquila and Priscilla.

 

Verses 4-5: When he hears their response, Paul presents the true facts concerning John and his baptism. Paul explains to these Ephesian disciples what John did (baptized unto repentance) and what John preached (Christ Jesus). Some read verse 5 as continuing the statement about John the Baptist, that is, when the people heard John’s preaching, they believed on the one who was to come and were baptized in his name. More likely in context, “they” refers to the Ephesians rather than John’s hearers. If so, then their understanding was that their baptism was null and their reaction was to be baptized.


[i] Principles of Practice In the New Testament Church, David Pyles, 2015, p. 94. http://www.pb.org/PBDocs/PrinPrac.pdf Accessed October 22, 2020 2:15 pm.
[ii] For example: “The disciples whom St Paul found in Ephesus on his return (Acts xix 1 ff) are probably hearers of Apollos who had been attracted by his speaking and teaching in the streets of Ephesus or elsewhere. Baptism, as practised by John Baptist, would be the natural sequel of professed repentance.” “Apollos,” J. H. A. Hart, Journal of Theological Studies, Volume VII, No. 25, October, 1905, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1906, p. 22.

Wednesday, July 10, 2024

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).

Tuesday, July 09, 2024

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.

Monday, July 08, 2024

Pause, my soul, and think

“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.” Epistle of Jude, verse 6

Pause, my soul, over the solemn account. Think, duly think, of the fallen state, into which, by nature and by practice, thou art brought by this apostasy. And when thou hast had thy mind thoroughly impressed with the awfulness of such a situation, turn thy thoughts to the due contemplation also of the love, and grace, and mercy of God, in thy recovery. Sweetly dwell on the love of God thy Father, in the gift of his dear Son, for the purposes of redemption. Mark well the blessed features of the Son in his work of mercy, in this great accomplishment. And do not overlook, but delight evermore to contemplate the love of God the Holy Ghost, in condescending both to bring thee acquainted with the grace of the Father, and of the Son, and to incline thine heart to the thankful belief of it, and love of both!

And that the whole subject may have its full influence upon thee, to induce in thee all the suitable and becoming affections of love, thanksgiving, holy obedience, and praise to the Author of such mercy; mark well the distinguishing nature of that grace, which hath left fallen angels in their ruin and misery, reserved in everlasting chains under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day, while bestowing pardon, reconciliation, and favour, upon fallen men, amidst all our unworthiness, sin, and rebellion.

Excerpted from Robert Hawker (1753-1827), The Poor Man’s Evening Portion

Sunday, July 07, 2024

Pleading His Gracious Name

John Newton wrote the hymn “The Effort.” It was published in Olney Hymns, in Three Books (London: W. Oliver, 1779), by Newton and William Cowper. It is found in six common meter stanzas as Hymn XII (Book III, pp. 324-325) in the section “Seeking, Pleading, and Hoping.”

Newton was born in 1725, and died in 1807. He was buried at St Mary Woolnoth Churchyard in London, where he ministered nearly 30 years. In 1893, the remains of he and his wife Mary were moved to the churchyard of St. Peter and Paul in Olney, the town where he and Cowper produced their famous hymn book.

In life Newton is well known as a converted former slave trader who helped influence the eventual abolishment of the slave trade in England. In hymnody, he is best known as the author of “Amazing grace, how sweet the sound.”

In some sources this hymn is titled “Pleading His Gracious Name,” based on the fourth line of the fifth stanza. I know the hymn paired with the fine old hymn tune Peterborough. Peterborough has often been attributed to Ralph Harrison. However, Chris Brown, a Sacred Harp singer in England, did some extensive research on this tune and believes that that attribution is in error. He pointed out that though the first four bars of Peterborough share things in common with Harrison’s tune Salisbury, the rest of it is very different. The tune does not either of Harrison’s books (Sacred Harmony: 1784 & Sacred Harmony: 1788), according to Brown.

Both Brown and Sacred Harp researcher Karen Willard believe that Peterborough, as it appears in editions of The Sacred Harp, is a version of the tune Lavington, which first appeared in The Musical Instructor by Lewis Seymour and Thaddeus Seymour (New York, NY: Printed by John C. Totten, 1803). It was retitled Peterborough by Samuel Webbe Jr, unattributed, in A Collection of Psalm Tunes intermixed with airs, adapted as such from Haydn, Purcell, Handel, Corelli (published in Britain in 1808). Brown believes it is extremely unlikely that Webbe would not have attributed the tune to Harrison had he in fact known he wrote it. 

The tune can be heard HERE, though it is from a different book, with different words that I am discussing here.

This hymn is a wonderful plea – and a wonderful song of comfort to “burdened souls” recognizing the Lord calls burdened souls to him.

The effort—in another measure.

1. Approach, my soul, the mercy-seat,
Where Jesus answers pray’r;
There humbly fall before his feet,
For none can perish there.

2. Thy promise is my only plea,
With this I venture nigh;
Thou callest burden’d souls to thee,
And such, O Lord, am I.

3. Bow’d down beneath a load of sin,
By Satan sorely pressed,
By war without, and fears within,
I come to thee for rest.

4. Be thou my shield and hiding-place!
That, shelter’d near thy side,
I may my fierce accuser face,
And tell him “Thou hast dy’d.”

5. Oh wond’rous love! to bleed and die,
To bear the cross and shame;
That guilty sinners, such as I,
Might plead thy gracious name.

6. “Poor tempest-tosséd soul, be still,
My promised grace receive;”
’Tis Jesus speaks—I must, I will,
I can, I do believe.

The title “The effort—in another measure” indicates there is another hymn of the same type, but written in a different measure of poetry (meter). In fact, the previous hymn is titled “The effort” and is written in 10s. meter. The two are very similar. Though I prefer the common meter version, in a few places the longer version provides clarity – such as the last line of stanza four.

The effort.

1. Cheer up, my soul, there is a mercy-seat
Sprinkled with blood, where Jesus answers pray’r;
There humbly cast thyself, beneath his feet,
For never needy sinner perish’d there.

2. Lord, I come! thy promise is my plea,
Without they word I durst not venture nigh;
But thou hast called the burden’d soul to thee,
A weary burden’d soul, O Lord, am I!

3. Bow’d down beneath a heavy load of sin,
By Satan’s fierce temptations sorely pressed,
Beset without, and full of fears within,
Trembling and faint I come to thee for rest.

4. Be thou my refuge, Lord, my hiding-place,
I know no force can tear me from thy side,
Unmov’d I then may all accusers face,
And answer ev’ry charge with “Jesus dy’d.”

5. Yes, thou didst weep, and bleed, and groan, and die,
Well hast thou known what fierce temptations mean;
Such was thy love, and now, enthron’d on high,
The same compassions in thy bosom reign.

6. Lord give me faith—he hears—what grace is this!
Dry up thy tears, my soul, and cease to grieve:
He shews me what he did, and who he is,
I must, I will, I can, I do believe.

Saturday, July 06, 2024

A Southern Unionist, and other Baptist history links

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

Friday, July 05, 2024

Redemption through his blood

Extol the Lamb of God,
The all-atoning Lamb;
Redemption through his blood
Throughout the world proclaim: 
The Year of jubilee is come;
Return, ye ransomed sinners, home.
(Charles Wesley, No. 3, Hymns for New-Year’s-Day, 1750)

Poor Charles Wesley and his “ignorant” hymn writing. [i] Colossians 1:14 has a major variation between the King James Bible and modern translations based on the critical texts. “redemption through his blood” is in the King James translation, but not in the CSB, ESV, LEB, NASB, NET, NIV, RSV, et al.

  • Colossians 1:14 KJV in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
  • Colossians 1:14 NET in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

I found the note in the NET Bible intriguing.

26 tc διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ (dia tou haimatos autou, “through his blood”) is read at this juncture by several minuscule MSS (614 630 1505 2464) as well as a few, mostly secondary, versional and patristic witnesses. But the reading was prompted by the parallel in Eph 1:7 where the wording is solid. If these words had been in the original of Colossians, why would scribes omit them here but not in Eph 1:7? Further, the testimony on behalf of the shorter reading is quite overwhelming: א A B C D F G Ψ 075 0150 6 33 1739 1881 𝕸 latt co as well as several other versions and fathers. The conviction that “through his blood” is not authentic in Col 1:14 is as strong as the conviction that these words are authentic in Eph 1:7.

  • Ephesians 1:7 in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
If these words had been in the original of Colossians, why would scribes omit them here but not in Eph 1:7?” Um… because they made a scribal error? Miscopied it? I realize the issue is more complicated than this, but it is mind-boggling to me that textual critics make and put weight in such an argument! Otherwise they are constantly and consistently arguing for scribal errors, and yet suddenly scribes could not have made an error here unless they also made an error in Ephesians 1:7? To quote President Biden, “Come on, man.” Who can believe this stuff?

Conversely, we might wonder, if a scribe were deliberately paralleling the statement in Ephesians, why didn’t he also add “according to the riches of his grace”?

This is not a critical answer to the critical text guys. Nevertheless, I am often bumfuzzled by the sorts of arguments that might satisfy them.

[i] Colossians 1:14 in the John Wesley New Testament translation: In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins: John Wesley was the brother of Charles Wesley.

Thursday, July 04, 2024

Acts, Apollos and “re”baptism

Apollos, a lesson on “re”baptism (Acts 18).

Aquila and Priscilla did not baptize Apollos. Apollos was taught; he was not “rebaptized” – though some imagine it. For example, George Eldon Ladd writes:

 

Quite likely, Apollos was now baptized by Aquila in the name of Christ.[i]

 

However, “His preaching was not inaccurate, merely incomplete.”[ii] Apollos did not require baptism, but rather being instructed more completely, especially concerning recent developments and events.[iii]

 

The stories of Apollos (18:24-28) and of the twelve Ephesians (19:1-7) are cut from the same piece of cloth. The first is an introduction to the second, and the second is a conclusion of the first. These cannot be interpreted correctly in isolation. By properly interpreting the matter, we understand that “the baptism of John” itself was not defective. Longenecker sees the problem of reading baptism into the account of Apollos, and resolves it this way (though seeming to deduce the Ephesians were baptized by John himself):

 

“When baptism by John the Baptist was seen as pointing beyond itself to Jesus (as with Apollos), it was apparently taken as Christian baptism and was not repeated on learning and experiencing more of the faith. But when John’s baptism was understood as rivaling commitment to Jesus, then on profession of faith in him, Christian baptism ‘into the name of the Lord Jesus’ was administered.”[iv]

 

Verse 27: From Ephesus Apollos traveled to Achaia (including Corinth, 19:1). “the brethren in Ephesus wrote” a letter recommending – exhorting even – that the brethren in Achaia receive Apollos. They did so, and Apollos was a great help to the believers there, “for he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.”

 

New Testament churches practice regenerate church membership. That is, a biblical congregation is made up of born-again believers who have received scriptural baptism. Membership is voluntary on the part of both the individual and the church, as well a fellowship matter on both their parts. Members are received in three ways:

 

(1) new Christians by profession of faith and baptism, Acts 2:41; Matthew 28:19-20

 

(2) previously born-again baptized believers by “recommendation” (by letter or in person) Acts 9:26-27, 18:27; Romans 16:1-2; II Corinthians 3:1

 

(3) disciplined members by restoration or reinstatement, Galatians 6:1; II Corinthians 2:6-8.

 

Verse 28: Apollos’s help came in convincing the Jews by their scriptures, not only privately but also publicly, that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ (their Messiah) prophesied in the scriptures. His theology agreed with the testimony of Paul (18:5). “I [Paul] have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase” (I Corinthians 3:6).


[i] Ladd, Wycliffe Commentary, p. 1159.
[ii] Bock, Acts, p. 592, Easton’s Dictionary, p. 81.
[iii] “…Aquila and Priscilla…were ‘on the cutting edge’ of NT revelation and theology, far more so that Apollos. They only knew one baptism, but they also had Paul to teach them, and they may have even had copies of some of his early epistles…” Grassi, p. 580.
[iv] Longenecker, Acts, p. 290.

Wednesday, July 03, 2024

The Triquetra and the NKJV

Triquetra, noun. A triangular geometrical figure used as an ornamental design, especially one having three interlaced arcs.

The Thomas Nelson hardback New King James Version (NKJV) that I own does not have the symbol on the cover (as shown above), but rather it is moved inside to the cover page. It is my understanding that new NKJV Bibles no longer have the symbol.

Title page logo: The triquetra (from a Latin word meaning ‘three-cornered’) is an ancient symbol for the Trinity. It comprises three interwoven arcs, distinct yet equal and inseparable, symbolizing that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct yet equal Persons and indivisibly One God.” (NKJV, 1982, p. ii)

Pastor Scott Ingram stirred up a lot of folks with a recent YouTube video, Why is there a Symbol on the NKJV Bible?

(starts about 2:34) “The source is a lady named Gail Riplinger…who many years ago wrote a book called New Age Bible Versions and many people found her book enlightening and have used it as a source for their studies on the differences in Bible translations. The image and the information about this that is frequently copied and pasted and repeated is from one of her tracts on the NKJV. At the beginning of this tract (called ‘The Death Certificate for the NKJV’) she gives us this information about the symbol that’s on the NKJV. She asserts the NKJV logo is the ancient symbol for the Pagan Trinity not the Christian Trinity…”


This symbol on the New King James Version (NKJV) has kindled much smoke and fire in the Bible versions debates, plenty of heat that generates little light. The tract of Gail Riplinger (mentioned by Ingram and illustrated above) is just one of many examples of the charge against the NKJV using a pagan symbol.

Truly Gail Riplinger has had oversized influence among some King James Bible supporters. However, some others claim that they have studied the issue for themselves and independently came to the same general conclusion as Riplinger, without having ever read her statement on the triquetra. I have no reason to doubt their honesty. NKJV supporters have pushed back against the charge. NKJV translator James D. Price has been particularly active, writing against the Death Sentence by Riplinger and even on The Triquetra itself.

Symbols created from figures such as loops, circles, squares, and triangles are inherently neutral. Therefore, a symbol represents what the user means for it to represent.[i] This, however, does not exclude its meaning different things to different people. The use and meaning according to more than one source can create confusion in the mind of persons seeing the symbol. Nevertheless, it is best to assume the editor/publishers of the NKJV used the triquetra symbol for the reason they claim, even if it has other associations. When this debate heats up, it clouds the real issue – what is the worth of the NKJV as a translation – and leads to more charges and countercharges.[ii]

If this were a ploy of Satan, for what reason would he and his minions place a pagan satanic symbol on a product he intends to market to conservative Christians? None I can think of. He is a more skilled deceiver than that (Revelation 12:9).

From www.theirishroadtrip.com

Do not take any thing I have written as a defense of the New King James Version. It is a poor substitute intended to supplant the King James Bible. There are reasons to object to it replacing the old King James Version. However, what is on its cover really is not one of them. This argument tends to appeal to emotion and superstition rather than biblical theology and sound reasoning. It obscures the real issues that should be dealt with concerning the NKJV.

The things that should be inspected and considered most, rather than some ternion ornamental design, are the meat of the translation itself:

  • Some of the translators worked simultaneously on the New International Version, and
  • The translators of the NKJV did not prefer the Greek text they were using, and
  • There are some Critical Text preferences that creep into the readings, via either text or translation.

I can sum up my personal objections to the NKJV in three categories, “text issues,” “translation issues,” and “trust issues.”


[i] The Irish Road Trip and The Book of Kells provide some interesting thoughts on the triquetra.
[ii] This is not just a made-up possibility. For example, I have heard folks who dislike the old King James Bible claim that the 1611 printing of this translation has Rosicrucian & Masonic symbols in the art work. See also How many occult symbols can you find in the 1611 first edition of the King James Bible? There is an apparently new “conspiracy theory” that Scofield Reference Bibles use the circumpunct (ʘ) as a marker for some desperate clandestine purpose! (The Scofield notes are often deficient and unsound; we don’t have to look for something wrong in a neutral geometrical figure used to mark verses.)

Tuesday, July 02, 2024

Arthur Farstad on Geneva and NKJV Bibles

Arthur Leonard Farstad (1935-1998) was executive of the New King James Version, and co-editor (with Zane Hodges) of a Greek Majority Text New Testament. He was a theologian who taught at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas. Additionally, he was a co-founder of the Majority Text Society, as well as editor of the Grace Evangelical Society journal.

“God has used many Bibles...And the Geneva, the people who founded America did not use the King James, they used the Geneva. They thought the King James was too ‘high church.’ It said, ‘Church’ instead of ‘congregation’ and ‘bishop’ instead of ‘overseers.’ The Pilgrims and Puritans of Plymouth Colony didn’t use the King James. The foundation of our country was on the Geneva Bible.”

Arthur Farstad, about the Geneva and King James Bibles on the John Ankerberg Show “The King James Only Controversy Revisited – Program 2.”

This statement by Art Farstad demonstrates how some of the Christian urban myths get spread. Leaving the case of what the Pilgrims used (for which, see my “Bibles at the Pilgrim Hall Museum at Plymouth”), let’s consider the reasons given for the “people who founded America” using the Geneva Bible instead of the King James Bible – the words “church” and “bishop.” This is easily falsified by actually looking at a Geneva Bible instead of just taking the word of an authority. These “people who founded America” would have had ready access to the 1599 Geneva Bible (but the same facts are true concerning the 1560 Geneva). An easy check is available at BibleGateway, though scans of the original are available online also. The word “church” and “churches” are used in 113 verses in the Geneva Bible New Testament (1 less than the KJV). “Congregation” only appears 3 times in the Geneva New Testament, two of which have nothing to do with the New Testament church. Bishop appears 5 times in the Geneva Bible, four in reference to a church office, and once in reference to Jesus (Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1-2; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 2:25). This compares to six times in the KJV. The Geneva Bible did not shy away from the words “church” and “bishop”!

No doubt Art Farstad believed this to be true. Most all of us – yes, even scholars – more readily tend to accept without proof that which we already believe. His believing it to be true does not make it so. Apparently he never checked! Sadly, such myths get spread around. “This must be true – some scholar said it!”

“Originally it was planned to use the Majority Text for the NKJV, not the TR used in the KJV. This was changed near the end of the project. Strangely enough, the one who talked Thomas Nelson into not using the Majority Text was Zane Hodges himself. (He was not, however, on the translation team.) Zane argued that a version should not be based on a Greek text that had not been on the market for a few years to allow time for scholarly appraisal. Also, many felt that this updating of the classic KJV should not introduce another Greek text, like the English Revised had done in 1881 before the Westcott-Hort text (also 1881) had a chance to be evaluated.”

Arthur Farstad. The above statement is found in “Why I Became a Majority Text Advocate,” which is an “Unpublished paper by Arthur L. Farstad when he was at Dallas Seminary.” It is posted on the Dean Bible Ministries website of Robert L. Dean, Jr.  Dean earned a ThM and PhD at Dallas Theological Seminary (where Hodges & Farstad taught).

This statement by Arthur Farstad about the New King James translation suggests that the work on it began with the Majority Text as its textual basis, and then was changed to the Textus Receptus. It would be good to know more about this, and if Farstad discussed or wrote more about it elsewhere. That “start and change” could help explain some of the inconsistencies in the New King James translation.

Monday, July 01, 2024

The Plain Song of Scripture

To come with the inticing words of mans wisedome, and to preach only themselves is the note of false Teachers: the charge of Christs Minister is in demonstration of the spirit and of power to divide the word of truth aright unto his people...Gods oracles are to be faithfully expounded, not curiously minced, not loosly dallied with, and surely the plaine song of Scripture is the best musicke without these quavering descants of mans wit. 

Christopher Potter, editor, Lectures on the Whole Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians, 1618

Sunday, June 30, 2024

An East Texas song in an East Texas book

Julian H. “Sharp” McNiel and Bernard N. Richards formed the McNiel-Richards Music Company in 1908. They published in 1909 Soul Songs and Sonnets: A superior collection of Songs and Hymns for the Church, Revival, Sunday-school, Prayer Service and Convention. This book includes a song by Methodist preacher Charles L. “Charlie” Hamill, Are You On Your Way. I have not seen it elsewhere.

The note under the song title indicates the melody was sung by Charlie Hamill, memorized by Margaret Ann Cox Day, and later written down & harmonized by Joe R. Day.

“Words and melody as sung by Rev. Charlie Hammel, on the Melrose circuit in Nacogdoches County, in the year 1860. Copied and committed to memory by my mother when a girl, and recalled Jan. 10, 1909.—J. R. D.”

The poetry leans toward the Wesleyan Arminianism of Methodism (as might be expected). Nevertheless, I think the song worth preserving for its historical value. The music (tune) is intriguing as well.


1. Oh! brethren, are you on your way, And truly bound to watch and pray?
Go on thro’ all your trials sore; We’ll meet on that delightful shore.
Hard trials we have to pass thro’, And tiresome they are it is true,
But Jesus says He’ll go before, And land us on that happy shore.

2. Go on dear brethren in the Lord, And put your trust in Jesus’ word,
He says He’ll help you on your way, If you will truly watch and pray.
Oh! Sinners, we’ve a word for you; Your case is awful it is true,
The gospel you have heard in vain, Will surely add unto your pain.

3. We’ve tried to lead you in the way, That leads to everlasting day,
But, if with us you will not go, Your way will lead to endless woe.
The time will come when we no more Will preach the gospel to the poor,
Poor sinners then will weep and cry, And call for mountains as they fly.

The composer/harmonizer of this song was Joseph Randolph Day, who was born and died in Nacogdoches County (1873-1957). His mother was Margaret Ann H. Cox, daughter of John Randolph Cox and Louisa Louvinia Chapman. Her father was a Methodist minister. Cox and Charlie Hamill labored together in the San Augustin District of the East Texas Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South – at least in 1860. Margaret Ann Cox married James Absalom Day in 1872.

It is uncertain whether Charles Hamill might have composed the words and music of Are You On Your Way, or whether he simply sang a previously known song.

Charles L. Hamill was born June 9, 1830 in Tennessee, the son of Charles (approx. 1786-1870) and Jane Hamill (d. 1846). In 1850 Charles (a student) was living with his father, stepmother (Sophia Blakemore Hamill), and two stepsisters, in Desoto County, Mississippi.

Hamill married Mary A. Garwood July 26, 1853 in Carroll County, Tennessee. It appears they had no children. They were in Texas by 1855, when Charles was accepted on trial in the East Texas Methodist Conference. In 1860 Charles and Mary were living with the Dan Atkins family in Nacogdoches County near Melrose. He is listed as a Methodist Episcopal South minister.
 
Charles L. Hamill died February 14, 1865 at age 34. He was buried in the Marshall Cemetery in Marshall, Harrison County, Texas. After his death, Mary married F. A. Schluter in May 1865 in Harrison County.

Known ministerial career
Hamill may have possibly served parts of the years 1862-1864 as a chaplain or soldier during the War Between the States.


The Texas Republican, February 17, 1865, p. 2

Bibliography
* A special thanks to Bill T. Whitis of the Harrison County Historical Museum’s research library for help in finding information about Charles Hamill.