Home » Posts tagged 'doctrine of preservation'

Tag Archives: doctrine of preservation

New List of Reasons for Maximum Certainty for the New Testament Text (Part 2)

ANSWERING AGAIN THE “WHAT TR?” QUESTION

Part One

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.

Ahhh certainty, what some people call “epistemic hubris,” but I digress.  One thing that modern version and critical text supporters are certain about?  You can’t be certain about the text of the New Testament.  They’re certain of that.  And how do they know with such certainty so as to call people dangerous and extremist, who are certain?  They know the same way that any one of you are certain that Covid arose from an animal in a wet market in Wuhan, China.  You can’t be certain about the text of scripture even though scripture teaches certainty on the text of scripture.  No, only a degree of confidence somewhere less than the efficiency of Tide detergent.

So I can get behind a keyboard and be a tough guy.  That’s easy.  But what about putting a blog where my mouth is.  Let us continue.

Meaning of Kept

In His high priestly prayer in John 17, Jesus says in verse 6, “They have kept thy word.”  “Kept” is the Greek word tareo, which BDAG says means:

1.  to retain in custody, keep watch over, guard . . . .  2. to cause a state, condition, or activity to continue, keep, hold, reserve, preserve someone or something.

Jesus uses the word tareo a few verses later in verse 12, saying:

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

The word kept that Jesus uses in verse 6, He defines in verse 12.  Twice he says He “kept them.”  And then He says, “None of them is lost.”  If someone keeps something or someone, then nothing or no one was lost.  If something or someone is lost, it or he was not kept.  Let’s say Jesus originally saved 100,000 people, but in the end only 99,995 or so were saved.  He couldn’t say, “None of them is lost.”  Five of them were lost.  If you were one of the five, you would take a change in the definition of “kept” very seriously.

Consider this dialogue.

“I gave you those fifty marbles.  Did you keep them?”

“Yes.”

“So how many do you have?”

“I have 48 of them.”

“I thought you said you kept them.”

“I did.”

“No you didn’t; you lost two of them.  That’s not keeping the marbles.  That’s losing.”

That’s a basic tutorial on the concept of keep or preserve.

Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic Words

The Bible promises preservation of what God gave, inscripturated, or inspired.  What He gave were words almost exclusively in Hebrew and Greek, and a few in Aramaic.  What He gave He also kept or preserved.  God didn’t give, inscripturate, or inspire English words.  He gave Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic words and those were the ones He also kept or preserved.

What Jesus said in Matthew 5:18 corroborates this obvious idea of kept or preserved.  Jesus said:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Jesus was speaking of the Old Testament and a jot and a tittle were both Hebrew letters, not some other language.  Again, this was not a promise to preserve one particular manuscript or physical scroll.  In its context (Matthew 5:17-20) it did mean that scripture, its letters and words on pages, would remain available to read and heed.

4.  God’s Promise of Keeping and Preserving His Words Means the Availability of His Words to Every Generation of Believers.

Availability or General Accessibility

Keeping means availability.  Availability means general accessibility.  Scripture shows this again and again.  God kept the words for people to know and obey.  Keeping them for His people to whom He gave them means their availability for those people to use.

Saying “general accessibility” means that someone may not have his own copy of scripture at home.  The words were available in general for believers in general.  Words not generally accessible were not the words God kept for His people.  Because a single ancient manuscript was on earth somewhere does not mean it was available or generally accessible.  It wasn’t.  God’s people did not have it to read and heed.

Versus Buried Text View

A doctrine of availability accompanies a true doctrine of preservation.  I call the alternative a “buried text view.”  Critical text proponents are still searching for lost hand copies and ancient translations for the sake of restoring a lost text.  Every time a person or organization announces that he or it found a very old page of scripture, critical text scholars relish with great expectation to find new information for possible purposes of correction.

Those who believe in perfect preservation for every generation of believer do not expect to find a buried or lost text that will correct the present text of scripture.  They believe in preservation and availability.  That lost copy was not available.  It couldn’t be what God preserved or kept.

New Testament Language of the Received Text

The language, “received text,” elicits the truth of availability.  Something not available was not received by anyone.  “Received text” itself, as a description of the preserved New Testament text, comes from scripture.

Gospels

Matthew 13:19-20, 22-23, “When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it.

He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful. But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.”

Luke 8:13, “They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.”

John 17:8, “For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.”

Acts

Acts 2:41, “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”

Acts 8:14, “Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John.”

Acts 11:1, “And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.”

Acts 17:11, “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

Epistles

1 Thessalonians 1:6, “And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.”

1 Thessalonians 2:13, “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”

James 1:21, “Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.”

How could believers or churches receive God’s Word or Words if they were not available?  They couldn’t.  But this was not the case.  They could receive His Words because of the general accessibility of them for every generation of believer.

More to Come

New List of Reasons for Maximum Certainty for the New Testament Text

ANSWERING AGAIN THE “WHAT TR?” QUESTION

Sixty-Six Books

Many evangelicals claim maximum certainty on sixty-six books of the Bible.  “Are you certain there are sixty-six books of the BIble?”  “Yes.”  “What verse in the Bible says to expect sixty-six books?”  “None.”  “So what is your basis for sixty-six books of the Bible?”  Many of their reasons would match what I would give for certainty on the text of the Bible, certainty on what the exact words are.

The reasons for certainty on both the books and the words relate to biblical principles for canonicity.  Nothing in the Bible states how many books one should expect though.  And yet these evangelicals still declare maximum certainty about “sixty-six.”  Sixty-six came from God.  No verse saying that, but they still rely on scripture for their certainty.  They don’t have mere confidence for sixty-six books.  They have certainty.

Very often the same evangelicals’ direct inquiries to me about where the Bible says God would preserve the textus receptus, those particular Latin words.  In addition they ask for a verse with the exact words, “King James Version” in a scriptural promise somewhere. They consider these to be “arguments.”

The question arises, “How do we know, for instance, the epistle of James is in the Bible or Galatians or any other single book?”  What gives the certainty for inclusion of particular books?  How do we know when we’re reading Hebrews that it is in fact the Word of God, more than a mere ancient, naturalistic book?

The Preservation of Words

On the other hand, does God promise to preserve His Words perfectly in a single printed edition of the New Testament?  This gets to the crux of the “which TR” question.  Scripture teaches perfect preservation of scripture, but how do we know what the words are?  How do we know what the books are?  The answer is the same to those last two questions.  In fact, scripture talks about words and not about books.  It’s easier to prove the preservation of words from scripture than it is books.

The Bible doesn’t provide naturalistic rules for deciding on the words of the Bible, ones like shorter or more difficult reading and older manuscript.  Men made up those rules and with them, they added, “You can’t be certain.”  God’s Word though says you can and should be certain.  You expect certainty based upon scripture.  The Bible also provides criteria not in the nature of rules, but in presuppositions, promises, and principles.  Scripture provides a template, paradigm, or model for what to expect from God and His preservation of scripture.

I want to review the right presuppositions again.  Again.  I’ve done this a lot, but here we go again, because based on information from my critics, no one answers this. [Not liking the answer does not qualify as not answering.]

I’m going to give a list, because obviously lists are greater click bait.  And if I don’t have a list, I shouldn’t say “list” in my click bait title.

1.  God Inspired Specific, Exact Words, and All of Them.

Not Just the Gist

Someone named Eugene Peterson did a paraphrase of the Bible, called The Message.  That’s very often how people want to deal with scripture.  It’s a message and so the very words don’t matter so much, as long as you get “The Message.”  What’s God saying to you?  Here’s the gist of it, that’s all that matters.  And part of the gist, of course, comes from Eugene Peterson’s brain.

I say, get the gist of scripture.  It’s important.  But that’s not all that matters.  God gave words.  Every one of them matter.  You don’t get the gist without words and God said this in many different passages.  I’m not going to review those with you on this point, but it is true.

Some people miss the gist, and that’s too bad.  They need to and should get that too, but God first gave words.  Christians have believed that every word matters.  God gave specific, exact ones.  He delivered them to His institution.  They received them (think Textus Receptus here).

All of Them

I added, “and all of them,” because God’s Word, the Bible, or scripture is not 50 percent of the exact words or even 95 percent.  It is all of them.  I’m happy to have 10 percent of them, but He gave 100 percent.  I should expect 100 percent.  God even uses the word, “all.”  He gave each Word and then all of them.

God inspired only one Bible.  There are not two.  People don’t have options as to what the Bible is.  It isn’t a multiple choice.  The question, “Which Bible do you use?” does not reflect what the Bible says about itself.  This kind of idea, which is prevalent now in evangelicalism, is destructive and it comes from unbiblical presuppositions about the Bible.

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.

Expectations

One can and should expect this second point in the list because God said He would do it.  He promised it.  Evangelicals or modern version proponents very often say God didn’t say “how” he would do it.  But He also did say how he would preserve His Words.  Believers should have those scriptural expectations.  This is part of living by faith.

Preservation of scripture means God keeping each of the words and all of them that He gave.  Keeping them then means their being available to every generation of believers.

The preservation of scripture means what the Bible says that preservation of scripture means.  It does not mean keeping every word in one particular physical handwritten copy that makes its way unblemished down through the following decades, centuries, and millennia or the annals of history.  Every word and all of them would remain available for God’s people.  There isn’t a peep about variants and manuscript evidence.

Not Naturalistic

Before someone goes anywhere else in answering questions about manuscripts, printed editions, and translations, he must settle on the first two points of this list.  He should start with what the Bible says.  He should not begin with an observation of history, “external evidences,” and naturalistic occurrences to which to conform his belief.  The Bible explains its own inspiration and preservation in a very clear way.  It’s not hard to understand.  Everyone will get the text and version issue wrong if he does not get these first two points of this list right.

What I’ve witnessed for decades now exclusively with modern version and critical text adherents is the absence of a biblical presupposition about the preservation of scripture.  They don’t want to touch that.  If that is their basis for how they approach their outcome, they know it will contradict what they’re saying.  What I’ve seen instead is that they start with a criticism or refutation of what has already been published and propagated on the doctrine of preservation through church history.

Presuppositions

Instead of starting with a scriptural position themselves, modern textual criticism proponents begin with naturalistic presuppositions like modernists of the 19th century did.  Based on those, they saw we can’t believe perfect preservation, because it didn’t happen.  They know it didn’t happen because variants exist between manuscripts.  It’s far worse than that even.  Their position starts with tests normally applied to secular literature, which have no promise of preservation because they’re solely of human origin.

Some critical text and modern version proponents straight out deny preservation.  Others don’t have a theology of no preservation of scripture.  They’d be too embarrassed to say that.  Instead they leave their audience with ambiguity, leaving their listeners confused on the subject, playing a shell game.  God’s Word doesn’t teach that.  Anything they call their biblical position arises to criticize someone who starts with a biblical doctrine with the purpose of either denying it, confusing it, or muddling it.

The elimination of a biblical doctrine of preservation affects the authority of scripture.  Critical text and modern version proponents are eradicating the doctrine or preservation ironically to preserve their preference.  In so doing, they cause people to take the Bible less seriously.  When people are not sure whether those are the actual words of God, they are less likely to believe and then keep what they say.

More to Come

A Movement Back to the Scriptural and Historical Belief of the Means of the Preservation of Scripture and God’s Sovereignty over His Written Words

In 2003 our church published, Thou Shalt Keep Them, a Biblical Theology of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture (if you prefer Amazon, then here).  When you might read the reviews, it reflects the good reviews.  The bad ones are because of someone who hates the position or got the kindle edition, which is not a great format of the book.  The book focuses on the crux of the issue on versions, that is, what does the Bible teach about its own preservation?

If God says He will preserve His Word, then believers will expect that to come true.  They believe what God said He would do.  God always does what He says He will do.   That issue starts and ends there.  Being a believer means believing scripture about scripture.

Our church planned to write a second book that would flesh out the practical ramifications of what God said.  It would probably add some further teaching on preservation not found in the first book.  The first one did not cover every single preservation passage, especially leaving out Isaiah 59:21 and Revelation 22:18-19.  Those two need covering too.  Also the second would likely include a chapter on the testimony of the Holy Spirit to Scripture.

To start, someone should ask, “What does the Bible teach about preservation of scripture?”  Then, “what does God promise that He will preserve?”  After that, “how does God say that He will preserve His Word?  Put in another way, “What is the means by which God said He would preserve His Word?”

Most evangelicals and fundamentalists say the Bible is silent on how it is preserved.  This matters.  It is major.  Our book, Thou Shalt Keep Them, explains the means of preservation.  God says how.   No one answered this point in Thou Shalt Keep Them.  I understand.  No critical text or multiple version person has an answer.

Our blog here gives you an index with all the articles written on the preservation of scripture and associated doctrines up until about two years ago, when I finished that index.  Besides the book we wrote, it is a one stop shop on many different facets of the issue.

Thomas Ross includes a section at faithsaves.net on the preservation of scripture.  He wrote many posts here on that doctrine too (see those with “T” next to them)He also produced a video course on the the doctrine of preservation and related doctrines.

I did not start a received text movement.  Jesus did that.  However, I have been at the forefront of a recent one.  You will see Thomas Ross and I with our own heading in a Wikipedia article, titled, “Verbal Plenary Preservation.”  Websites with our view mention our book (here, here).  Men quote the book on the subject (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and  here).  Oxford Handbook of the Bible quotes Thou Shalt Keep Them.

The received text movement continues to grow under the following names or titles:  Traditional Text, Ecclesiastical Text, Standard Sacred Text, and Confessional Bibliology.  I agree with these positions and the men who propagate them.  You can now find sites with reading and materials from these, such as Confessional Bibliology, Standard Sacred Text, Text and Translation, and Trinitarian Bible Society.  Jeff Riddle writes regularly on this doctrine at Stylos and makes video presentations or podcasts at his Word Magazine youtube site.  You can find articles at YoungTextlessandReformed and its podcast.  Also see textusreceptus.com.

The biblical and historical position moves forward in various evangelical denominations, including the Unaffiliated and Independent Baptists, certain Southern Baptists, Bible Churches, Free, Orthodox, and Bible Presbyterians, Reformed Baptists, and Free Churches.  I’m sure there are more.  Feel free to inform me.  England has many defenders of the scriptural and historical position on preservation, many in the fellowship of Peter Masters and Metropolitan Tabernacle.

I write, “God’s Sovereignty Over His Words,” because this represents Protestant and Baptist Confessions of Faith.  If God keeps believers in salvation, He surely can and will keep His Words.  The former proceeds from the latter.

Some new books have been written in the last few years.  I would hope to read some or all of these as soon as possible.  I’ve read the following book by Milne on kindle.  Peter Van Kleeck writes at the Standard Sacred Text website above.  I hope these men will think themselves free to refer to Thomas Ross and I by name.  We should strengthen one another on this doctrine.

2017

Has the Bible been kept pure? The Westminster Confession of Faith and the providential preservation of Scripture, by Garnet Howard Milne

2021

A Philosophical Grounding for a Standard Sacred Text: Leveraging Reformed Epistemology in the Quest for a Standard English Version of the Bible, by Peter Van Kleeck, Jr.

An Exegetical Grounding For A Standard Sacred Text: Toward the Formulation of a Systematic Theology of Providential Preservation, by Peter Van Kleeck, Sr.

2022

A Theological Grounding for a Standard Sacred Text: An Apologetic Bibliology in Favor of the Authorized Version, by Peter Van Kleeck, Sr. and Jr.

Why I Preach from the Received Text: An Anthology of Essays by Reformed Ministers

You have much to read and think about.  These resources will provide much to understand and take the biblical and historical position on the preservation of scripture against the attack by modern textual criticism.  Let us keep the momentum going for the glory of the Lord.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives