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