Page 71 - Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible Christianity. Based on the King James Bible

BIBLE VERSIONS

not an elitist issue. It was committed to ordinary people. hand today, even by those who claim to be
The child of God is required to depend upon the textual “evangelicals.” They say, “Did God really create the
scholars, because it is impossible for an ordinary world in six days?” or “Did God really destroy the entire
believer to make textual decisions. Textual criticism earth with a flood?” or “Did Moses really write the
involves such things as conflation, recension, inversion, Pentateuch?” or “Do the Gospels contain the very words
eclecticism, conjectural emendation, intrinsic and of Jesus?” or “Is Revelation really a prophecy of the
transcriptional probability, interpolation, statistical future?” or “Is hell really a place of fire and eternal
probability, harmonistic assimilation, cognate groups, conscious torment?” I see the hand of the old serpent in
hypothesized intermediate archetypes, stemmatic all such questionings.
reconstruction, and genealogical methods. Consider a The devil denied God’s Word (v. 4). This is the
sample of textual criticism from A.T. Robertson: “In skeptic’s approach to the Bible. He mocks it and openly
actual practice appeal should first be made to the denies that it is true. We find this, too, on every hand, in
external evidence of the documents by first coming to Hollywood movies, in the pages of popular magazines
understand the value of internal evidence of single and newspapers, in bestselling books. The blatant denial
readings. It will be seen that we have to consider the of God’s Word is even made by those who profess to be
internal evidence of single readings, the internal Christians.
evidence of single documents, the internal evidence of The devil substituted his own words for God’s Word
groups of documents, the internal evidence of classes of (v. 5). This is what false religions such as the Roman
documents. That way of putting it appears paradoxical, Catholic Church do with their extra-biblical traditions.
but it is literally true that the scientific use of the They say, “We believe in the Bible but we also believe in
external evidence (documents) turns on the application our traditions and councils and popes.” This was the sin
of the principles of internal evidence as seen in single of the Pharisees, who “made the commandment of God
readings. But the two methods must agree in result if of none effect” by their tradition (Mk. 7:9). The
one is to have confidence in his conclusion. ... The two dynamic equivalency method of Bible translation also
kinds of internal evidence are transcriptional and substitutes man’s words for God’s. [See Dynamic
intrinsic. ... It is best to begin with transcriptional Equivalency.)
e v i d e n c e a n d t h e n t o c o n s i d e r i n t r i n s i c
evidence” (Robertson, An Introduction to Textual As these studies progress, we will see that the devil
Criticism, pp. 149-150). It is impossible to reconcile this has continued to attack God’s Word throughout the
level of complexity with the simplicity that is in Christ church age. The child of God must therefore be alert to
(2 Co. 11:3) and with the scriptural fact that God has his activities in this field. It is impossible to understand
chosen the weak of this world to confound the mighty the Bible text-version issue if one does not understand
and
God’s Word
(Mt. 11:25; 1 Co. 1:20-29). the devil’s hatred a of prominent part if one does not
fact
this
make
his
“textual
of
4. I believe that all things should be done unto criticism.”
edifying (Ro. 14:19; 1 Co. 14:26; 2 Co. 12:19; Ep. 4:12,
16, 29). Any biblical research that does not result in 6. I believe in the pre-eminence of faith (He. 11:6;
spiritual edification is wrongheaded and is disobedience Ro. 10:17; 14:23). The only way to understand the
to the plain commands of the Word of God. I can Word of God is by faith. Faith is based only on God’s
candidly say that none of the many books I have read on Word (Ro. 10:17). The modern textual critic refuses to
modern textual criticism has spiritually edified me. I approach the Bible text-version issue by faith and mocks
have found them intellectually interesting, frustrating, those who do, and fundamentalists who are supporting
and confusing, but never edifying. the modern texts are following in their footsteps. For
of
Samuel
Schnaiter
University
Jones
Bob
5. I believe in the reality of the devil (1 Pe. 5:8). One of example, Wilbur Pickering’s Majority Text position as
critiques
the devil’s chief goals since the Garden of Eden has been follows: “Finally, although Pickering has avoided an
to attack and corrupt the Word of God and to confuse excessive reliance on theological presuppositions in his
people’s minds in regard to it. His first words to Eve were, presentation, it is nevertheless clear that a theological
“Yea, hath God said?” (Ge. 3:1). Consider the following presupposition essentially undergirds his entire
important lessons from this first attack: purpose” (“Focus on Revelation,” Biblical Viewpoint, Vol.
The devil questioned God’s Word (v. 1). This is the XVI, No. 1, April 1982, Bob Jones University, “Textual
first step toward openly denying God’s Word. If the devil Criticism and the Modern English Version Controversy,”
can cause a person to entertain doubts about the p. 72). How strange and frightful (and instructive) to see
authenticity of the Scriptures at any point, it is likely a professed fundamentalist criticizing a “theological”
that he can cripple him spiritually and open the way for approach to the Bible text-version issue! We do not have
increasing unbelief. The Bible is questioned on every to answer every question that can be asked (i.e., about
Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible & Christianity 71