Home » Posts tagged 'certainty'

Tag Archives: certainty

New List of Reasons for Maximum Certainty for the New Testament Text (Part 6)

ANSWERING AGAIN THE “WHAT TR?” QUESTION

Part One     Part Two     Part Three     Part Four     Part Five

1.  God Inspired Specific, Exact Words, and All of Them.
2.  After God Inspired, Inscripturated, or Gave His Words, All of Them, to His People through His Institutions, He Kept Preserving Each of Them and All of Them According to His Promises of Preservation.
3.  God Promised Preservation of the Words in the Language They Were Written, or In Other Words, He Preserved Exactly What He Gave.
4.  God’s Promise of Keeping and Preserving His Words Means the Availability of His Words to Every Generation of Believers.
5.  God the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity, Used the Church to Accredit or Confirm What Is Scripture and What Is Not.
6.  God Declares a Settled Text of Scripture in His Word.

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRESUPPOSITIONS, PRINCIPLES, AND PROMISES OF AND FROM SCRIPTURE (Part Two)

In five parts of this series, I first declared the scriptural presuppositions, principles, and promises that buttress the historical and biblical position.  Then I stated the positive conclusion of the provided model, paradigm, or template that followed the six truthful premises.  The underlying original language text of the King James Version is, as Hills asserted, its own “independent variety of the Textus Receptus.”  It is essentially Beza 1598, but not identical to that printed edition.  This conclusion fulfills the model, the biblical premises.

The Other Side Does Not Follow Scriptural Presuppositions

The other side, the critical text and multiple modern version position, does not follow scriptural presuppositions.  It proceeds from naturalistic and relativistic ones.  This is especially seen in the hundreds of lines of Greek text for its New Testament with no manuscript evidence.  Critics pieced together lines of text that never existed in any copy anywhere and anytime.  On the other hand, they commonly still make the claim that the underlying text behind the King James comes from just a “handful of manuscripts available at the time.”

A very common attack, which I anticipate again on this series, will skip all the presuppositions, principles, and promises and go directly to and then quote the concluding statement out of context.  It would sound something like this:  “Kent Brandenburg says, The perfect preserved text of scripture is ‘the underlying original language text of the King James Version.'”  I took that from the above first paragraph of this post.

The opposition then treats that statement like it stood alone with no explanation.  The enemies of the scriptural and historical position will provide strawman arguments.  They won’t be the actual ones in these posts, and if they provide any of them, they’ll misrepresent them.  You can count on this.  I take this bow shot or preemptive strike as a warning.

Scripture reveals presuppositions, principles, and promises about God’s preservation of scripture.  I could faithlessly ignore those.  Instead, I could focus on the existence of textual variants and the relatively few variations between the printed editions of the textus receptus.  Also, I could obsess over a couple individual words that critics say have little manuscript evidence.  Those challenge the presuppositions, principles, and promises.  I consider those minor challenges outweighed again by the presuppositions, principles, and promises.

Faith and the Model of Canonicity

Two verses that mean a lot to me related to the perfect preservation of the Greek New Testament is Romans 4:20-21:

20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

The same type of challenge occurs with the belief in twenty-seven books.  No verse says, “Twenty-seven books are in the New Testament,” just like no verse says that Noah’s ark is still on Mount Ararat.  Do I have faith that Noah’s ark is up there?  I believe it landed there and stayed.

Why the twenty-seven that we call the New Testament?  Some disagree.  Other opinions exist.  The presuppositions, principles, and promises are the same for twenty-seven New Testament books.  These were the ones the churches accepted, a testimony of the Holy Spirit through believers.

The Unacceptable Alternative

The alternative to this position I espouse here is unacceptable. It rejects these presuppositions, principles, and promises.  Also, it leaves the church without verbal, plenary perfection of scripture.  The position I take, as I see it and very strongly, is the best and really only position for a perfect scripture, what believers should expect.   Because of that, I take it.

Through the years, I have considered the arguments for the other side.  What I’ve seen is a regularly changing, morphing attack.  It’s as though they just throw anything and everything, the proverbial kitchen sink.  Their conclusion is the same:  uncertainty, doubt, the denial of scriptural and historical teaching, loss of authority, an ever changing and mutating scriptural text, and the ultimate apostasy that goes along with what they consider reality.

Certainty Versus “Confidence”

You can hear professing evangelicals attempt to fortify against the problem they create.  They can’t say “certainty,” and even mock “certainty.”  I hope you have a hard time even imagining this.  It does happen and is happening, but they ratchet down expectations with words like “confidence.”  It’s not even scriptural confidence, just confidence falsely so-called.  They create uncertainty and can’t be certain, so they adjust people’s mindset to a form of probability at a higher level of probability that they falsely label “confidence.”  It should be sued for false advertising.

From where does this confidence come for professing evangelicals who embrace confidence rather than certainty?  It comes from naturalism.  Yes, naturalism. They think they can give a high level of proof from naturalism and rationalism.  It’s like trying to convince people that the vaccination is safe.  Yes, they rushed it out, but look, they’re even vaccinating the president.  Evangelicals mock certainty in a nasty manner and then they focus on confidence.

Compare again confidence to a vaccination drive.  Can you get confidence from something at 95 percent?  We know God wants jot and tittle obedience.  Jesus said that in Matthew 5:17-20.  These evangelicals don’t offer jot and tittle certainty as the grounds for jot and tittle obedience.  This is also why they accompany their confidence with scaled down obedience.  Since their adherents can’t be sure of scripture, they emphasize non-essentials.  No one should separate over eschatology, ecclesiology, and a mounting stack of teachings.  Why?  No one can or should ensure certainty.  That’s not who we should roll with God’s Word.

What God Desires

The alternative to the truth also evinces the truth itself.  The truth stands.  Scripture teaches perfect preservation, availability, a settled text, and all the other of the six principles I listed in this series.  These form the basis for a sure, certain text of scripture that results in the kind of obedience God proposes and desires.

Is what God desires extremism and dangerous?  The side of uncertainty and doubt uses this kind of tactic, name-calling, labeling faith in scriptural teaching as extremist and dangerous.  Don’t worry.  That’s what they said about Jesus and the Apostles too.

I call on everyone reading to reject a critical, naturalistic text of scripture and the substandard probability, called “confidence,” that it engenders.  Those pushing that view are part of the downward trajectory, the steady decline, seen everywhere today.  They are part of what’s not getting better.

“Know For a Certainty,” As Seen in the Old Testament, Especially Joshua 23:13-14 and the Hebrew Idiom There, and Its Relevance to Today

While reading through the Bible a second time this year, I came across Joshua 23:13:

Know for a certainty that the Lord your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the Lord your God hath given you.

In a day of uncertainty, where we are challenged to say that we “know” anything for sure, here is a strong statement at the beginning of the verse, something the audience should “know for a certainty” that would happen in the future.  This could be considered a doctrine of its own, because how could anyone “know for a certainty” something is going to happen or not going to happen in the future?  I decided to look at the Hebrew behind this English translation to see what the words were.

“Know for a certainty” translates a Hebrew idiom, where the same Hebrew word is used back to back, and in this case it is yawda (my transliteration).  Yawda and yawda, the same Hebrew root, appear side by side.  The first form is yaw-doe-a (my transliteration), which is a qal infinitive absolute verb, and the second is te-də-oo´ (my transliteration), a qal imperfect, second person, masculine, plural verb.  Literally, the two words together say, “Knowing, ye will know.”  The sense of those two words in the English is “know for a certainty.”

In 1933, Charles Eugene Edwards wrote a journal article about the above Hebrew idiom construction in Bibliotheca Sacra, entitled, “A Hebrew Idiom.”  The first paragraph of that journal article reads [BSac 90:358 (Apr 1933) p. 232]:

In his commentary on Matthew, D. J. A. Alexander refers to a Hebrew idiom (p. 408) “which combines a finite tense and an infinitive of the same verb to express intensity, repetition, certainty, or any other accessory notion not belonging to the essential import of the verb itself”. An illustration is in Is. 6:9, which is more literally quoted in Matt. 13:14, “Hearing ye shall hear”, and “seeing ye shall see”. And Dr. Alexander remarks, (p. 358) “The Hebrew idiom is retained, which uses two forms of the same verb for intensity or more exact specification”. Too literal a translation might sometimes be barbarous or absurd. For example, Joseph never meant to say (Gen. 40:15) “For stealing I was stolen but as it is properly rendered, “For indeed I was stolen away out of the land of the Hebrews”.

The repetition of the same word brings intensity.  For the verb “know,” bringing intensity to “know” is “certainty” or “surety.”  That idiom of that exact Hebrew verb in Joshua 23:13 is found thirteen times in the Old Testament.  For your reference, here are those twelve usages underlined in the King James Version, minus Joshua 23:13:

Genesis 15:13, And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

Genesis 43:7, And they said, The man asked us straitly of our state, and of our kindred, saying, Is your father yet alive? have ye another brother? and we told him according to the tenor of these words: could we certainly know that he would say, Bring your brother down?

1 Samuel 20:3, And David sware moreover, and said, Thy father certainly knoweth that I have found grace in thine eyes; and he saith, Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved: but truly as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, there is but a step between me and death.

1 Samuel 20:9, And Jonathan said, Far be it from thee: for if I knew certainly that evil were determined by my father to come upon thee, then would not I tell it thee?

1 Samuel 28:1, And it came to pass in those days, that the Philistines gathered their armies together for warfare, to fight with Israel. And Achish said unto David, Know thou assuredly, that thou shalt go out with me to battle, thou and thy men.

1 Kings 2:37, For it shall be, that on the day thou goest out, and passest over the brook Kidron, thou shalt know for certain that thou shalt surely die: thy blood shall be upon thine own head.

1 Kings 2:42, And the king sent and called for Shimei, and said unto him, Did I not make thee to swear by the LORD, and protested unto thee, saying, Know for a certain, on the day thou goest out, and walkest abroad any whither, that thou shalt surely die? and thou saidst unto me, The word that I have heard is good.

Proverbs 27:23, Be thou diligent to know the state of thy flocks, and look well to thy herds.

Jeremiah 26:15, But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the LORD hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears.

Jeremiah 40:14, And said unto him, Dost thou certainly know that Baalis the king of the Ammonites hath sent Ishmael the son of Nethaniah to slay thee? But Gedaliah the son of Ahikam believed them not.

Jeremiah 42:19 The LORD hath said concerning you, O ye remnant of Judah; Go ye not into Egypt: know certainly that I have admonished you this day.

Jeremiah 42:22, Now therefore know certainly that ye shall die by the sword, by the famine, and by the pestilence, in the place whither ye desire to go and to sojourn.

Joshua in his speech to gathered Israel uses the same Hebrew verb in Joshua 23:14, the next verse:

And, behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the Lord your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, and not one thing hath failed thereof.

Looking at the usage of the verb in verse 13 and then in verse 14, the understanding is that they should know with certainty about their futures and that they already do know in the present.  They should know what’s going to occur in the future with certainty partly because they already know in the present.  What they know in the present in their hearts and in their souls, an expression that also brings intensity to knowing, is that not one thing failed of all the good things which the Lord their God spoke concerning them.  If they know that in the present, then they know with certainty also what God says to them through Joshua for their future.

Nothing is more sure than the Word of God.  It is so sure that the knowledge is certain.  If God says it, it is certain.  This certain knowledge could be and should be called, the truth.  It is the truth.  Any contradiction to it is a lie.  Today it could and should also at least be called, “science.”  God created all natural laws and He spoke all moral law.  They are both all true, knowledge, and scientific.

Uncertainty is a tool of Satan from the very beginning of time.  Satan’s temptation of Eve created uncertainty about what God said.  The uncertainty relates to the human will, giving a person liberty where he doesn’t have it.  The uncertainty about what God said gave Eve what she thought was liberty to eat.  Maybe she wouldn’t die if she ate of the tree.  Maybe God was doing something other than what He said.

The liberty created by uncertainty is a confusion of sovereignty.  Who is sovereign?  Or, who is the true or actual sovereign in the world?  Sovereignty shifts from God to man.  If I can’t be sure of what God said, then I am free to do what I want to do.  God can’t hold me responsible for something I couldn’t know.  This conflicts with faith that pleases God.  God isn’t pleased by the uncertainty that fuels unbelief and disobedience.  He wants us to be sure.

In Joshua 23:14, Joshua says, you already know.  This is a presupposition.  The Apostle Paul uses the same presupposition in Romans 1:18-20:

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.

Not knowing, being uncertain, is an excuse.  It isn’t a valid excuse.  It allows for a wide range of possibilities for men.  Anticipating that excuse, in Deuteronomy God takes a preemptive strike after repeating His law to the people Israel through Moses (30:11-14):

11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? 14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

Today people will say either the Bible was written by men, it isn’t preserved in a perfect way, or it can’t be understood because of the centuries of separation from its original writing.  The will of God then becomes very pliable, very adaptable to the will of man.  He won’t be challenged by authority because there is none.  He gets to do what he wants with uncertainty as his premise.  This is a lie, just like it was in the Garden of Eden.  Don’t think that you are free to go your own way because you can’t know the truth.  God’s Word is true.  Know with certainty.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives