 One of the tests that I use for determining the validity of a biblical text or translation is the test of inerrancy. This is one of the primary reasons that I prefer the Textus Receptus over the critical text. If the Word of God is inerrant, then the critical text cannot be the pure Word of God, for it contains many errors that are overlooked simply because the compilers of that text do not hold to the doctrine of inerrancy. For example, John 7:8 in the TR records Christ telling his brethren that He would not go with them to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles but would go to the feast later by Himself. This is how it reads in the KJV:
"Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come." The critical text leaves out the word "yet" in this verse. Here is how it reads in the ESV: "You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come." Verse 10 tells us that Jesus did go to the feast (it would have been sinful not to), but He went up later in secret. Thus, the critical text describes Jesus either as intending to break the Law and then changing His mind later or as a liar who intended to go to the feast all along and simply chose to lie to His brothers about it. The scholars creating the critical text see no problem in this passage because they do not consider inerrancy to be a major doctrine of theology. The same could be said for dozens of other passages. I've personally studied about 500 supposed errors and contradictions in the Bible, and I've found that all of them can be resolved with the text of the KJV and the TR, but there are many like this one in John 7:8 that cannot be resolved while using the critical text. When comparing manuscripts to determine which readings to include in a text, it is important that scholars include the doctrine of inerrancy as part of their decision-making process. It is not enough to just ask “What did the original autographs say?” That is an important question, but it is essentially meaningless unless the scholar also asks “What did God say?” Asking this additional question will often simplify the task of discovering the original reading by allowing the scholar to reject any reading that contains factual errors. The Apostle Paul praised the church in Thessalonica for treating the Bible as something more than just a human book. "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." (1 Thess. 2:13) Textual critics would do well to strive for the same commendation. Instead of treating the Bible as a collection of human stories, they should remember that it is the Word of God and allow the implications of that fact to guide their efforts in compiling texts. Unfortunately, supporters of the critical text often teach the exact opposite. Many of them will give lip service to the doctrine of inerrancy, but they say that this doctrine can only be applied after they determine which readings were from the original autographs. This view essentially nullifies the entire doctrine. It prevents textual critics from using inerrancy as a guide and forces them to deal with passages like John 7:8 by either rejecting the doctrine of inerrancy altogether or restricting its application solely to the original autographs which no longer exist. The idea that Christians should use this doctrine to determine what is and what is not the Word of God comes directly from the Bible itself. When God inspired Moses to write the Law, He warned the nation of Israel that other men would come and falsely claim to be speaking for God just like Moses. God gave Israel a way to test all prophets and determine which ones actually were sent by God. In Deuteronomy 18:21-22, God wrote: "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." God commanded Israel to use the doctrine of inerrancy as a litmus test for identifying the Word of God. They were commanded to test the accuracy of a prophet BEFORE accepting his words as the words of God. Any prophet who failed the test of inerrancy was to be rejected as a false prophet and put to death. Deuteronomy 18 is not the only passage that mentions the inerrancy test. We find it referenced several times throughout both Testaments. In Isaiah’s day, for example, God issued several challenges to Judah commanding them to put their false gods to the test of inerrancy. One of these challenges is found in chapter 43 where God said: "Let all the nations be gathered together, and let the people be assembled: who among them can declare this, and shew us former things? let them bring forth their witnesses, that they may be justified: or let them hear, and say, It is truth. Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God." (Isa. 43:9-12) God challenged Israel to test His Word against the words of their false gods and see who had told them the truth. He confidently proclaimed that they would only find His words to be true because He is the only true God. Long after many of the original scrolls of God’s Word had decayed and turned to dust, God still commanded that His people use the doctrine of inerrancy to determine which words were from Him and which were not. A similar challenge is found in Jeremiah where God said of the false prophets that: "The prophet which prophesieth of peace, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the LORD hath truly sent him." (Jer. 28:9) Here God said that the prophets who disagreed with Jeremiah were to be doubted until AFTER their prophecies came to pass. Jeremiah had already proven his validity as a prophet of God by passing multiple inerrancy tests, thus, anyone who disagreed with Jeremiah was to be received with skepticism until their prophecies had been proven to be inerrant. Jeremiah’s inerrancy was proven again when he prophesied that his opponent Hananiah would die within the year. "Then said the prophet Jeremiah unto Hananiah the prophet, Hear now, Hananiah; The LORD hath not sent thee; but thou makest this people to trust in a lie. Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will cast thee from off the face of the earth: this year thou shalt die, because thou hast taught rebellion against the LORD. So Hananiah the prophet died the same year in the seventh month." (Jer. 28:15-17) There are several references to inerrancy tests in the New Testament as well. The most familiar of these is found in Acts 17 where God said of the Bereans that: "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." (Acts 17:11) The Bereans were praised because they did not accept Paul’s claims until AFTER they tested them and found them to be true. God is never afraid of skepticism. In fact, He praises those who refuse to accept new doctrines until those doctrines have been tested for inerrancy. The Bereans tested Paul’s claims against their copies of the Old Testament and only accepted Christ as the promised Messiah after finding that Paul’s message was inerrant. In another passage, we are commanded to: "believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." (1 Jn. 4:1) And when God told John to write a letter to the church at Ephesus, He praised them for putting false apostles to the test and rejecting them because their words were not true (Rev. 2:2). God takes the doctrine of inerrancy very seriously. He repeatedly commands His people to rely on this doctrine as the way to identify His Word. He brings strong punishment against those who claim to speak for God but fail to speak inerrantly. And He applies the test of inerrancy to both the original documents of His Word and the surviving copies. This is not a doctrine that the church should jettison from the discussion of texts and translations. When we search the Scriptures to learn how we should apply the test of inerrancy to texts and translations of the Bible, we can see that God has given us at least seven categories of inerrancy to test for.
Inerrancy is not a trivial doctrine. God takes the purity of His Word very seriously. A text or translation that fails any one of these tests of inerrancy should be rejected as false unless and until it has been changed to eliminate the error. A Note on the KJV and the TR: I believe that the KJV is an inerrant translation. What I mean by that is I believe that the KJV accurately translates a compilation of manuscripts (ie: a text) that was proven by many churches to be without factual error or contradictions. I do not believe that the KJV translators received special inspiration from God to guide them in their translation work, nor do I believe that the KJV is the only possible inerrant translation. I believe that any translation that accurately translates an inerrant text is just as much an inerrant translation as the KJV. For example, Charles Thomson’s 1808 translation of the New Testament has this reading for John 7:8: “Go ye up to this festival. I am not yet going up to this festival, because my time is not yet fully come.” This translation of John 7:8 differs from the KJV translation, but they both say the same thing. I consider both of these translations of John 7:8 to be inerrant. They are both accurate translations of an inerrant text even though they differ from each other. They are the same in essence though not identical. Inerrancy is not a test for sameness; it’s a test for factual errors. Additionally, I have not found anything in Scripture that commands us to have only one translation per language or that commands us to never revise or alter a translation. I’m of the opinion that it is best to have a single inerrant translation in each language, and I’m of the opinion that revisions of this single translation should be very rare, but I hold to these opinions for practical reasons and not because they are commanded in Scripture.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Bill Fortenberry is a Christian philosopher and historian in Birmingham, AL. Bill's work has been cited in several legal journals, and he has appeared as a guest on shows including The Dr. Gina Show, The Michael Hart Show, and Real Science Radio.
Contact Us if you would like to schedule Bill to speak to your church, group, or club. "Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning." (Proverbs 9:9)
Search
Topics
All
Archives
November 2024
|
RSS Feed