For since the creation
of the world
His attributes are
clearly seen,
being understood by
the things that are made,
even His eternal power
and Godhead,
so that they are
without excuse.
Romans 1:20
As I (we) examine the various manuscripts and translations, transcriptions, at least a few to give some information by which you can be led to some knowledge of the few differences that I point out as being insertions, or omissions, that cannot be the inspired word of God, rather ideologies, or theologies that are of a man's opinion, but not based upon fact. The question that must be answered by a person who desires the truth is whether or not they, you, believe the Bible to be infallible, and preserved by God unto this day, and if so, is the translation you read, and expect to be the actual word of God, infallible, preserved, translated correctly, or not? Some of the theological scholars allow for divergent meanings from the apparent rendering of the text: an example would be the word "day" as found in the first verses of Genesis and make that word mean "age." Those scholars would suggest that translations, and interpretations should be filtered by various extra-biblical methods and standards. There are methods of naturalism, and allegorical methods, and various hybridization attempting to make accommodations synthesize naturalistic science and Biblical revelation. Some men, even much so today, have found "New" discoveries and these discoveries are some "new" found revelation. Unfortunately those discoveries are over and above God's word; this makes the Bible not to be infallible, and to be incomplete. How can anyone then trust the Bible if it is malleable and in need of "new" discoveries? Is God omnipotent, omniscient? Rejection of some portions of Scripture or Scripture fraught with interpolations, heretical insertions, or omissions will undermine our faith and even to the point of rejection the infallibility of the Bible, furthermore our understanding of the Bible will dissolve our confidence of God's revelation and the Biblical message, reducing the Gospel and our relationship with God, His Son, and not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide us.
A major controversy raging over the years is that of Mark 16:9-20: should they be considered Scripture and inspired by the Holy Spirit, or not? In fact if you examine your version, not the King James Version, or the New King James Version, you will either find that those verses are omitted, or that there is a footnote, a note, such as in the NIV which states: "The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20." The first thing to be understood is whether or not the "two most reliable manuscripts" are trustworthy? The NIV is translated from the Critical Text, and uses Griesback version of translation which are assaults on the integrity of the Word and who where repulsed by the Providence of God. It is the right view of the content of the Bible that will lead a person to right views of the history of the text. The Bible must by true, the Gospel then must be true and necessary for the salvation of souls. Therefore the Bible must have been infallibly inspired and any version that is corrupted must be rejected. The question still remains in regards to Mark 16:9-20; are they genuine portion of the Gospel of Mark? Those who render Mark 16 to end at verse 8 have a difficult task to support this with any satisfactory explanation as to how and why the Gospel came to an end at verse 8. It is so difficult that there has not as yet been an adequate answer. But the last twelve verses of Mark cannot be disowned on the strength of an unsupported statement, even when it is made by the most eminent of modern scholars. For these verses have an enormous weight of testimony in their favor which cannot be lightly set aside. They are found in all the Greek manuscripts except Aleph and B and in all the Latin manuscripts except k. All the Syriac versions contain these verses, with the exception of the Sinaitic Syriac, and so also does the Bohairic version. And, even more important, they were quoted as Scripture by early Church Fathers who lived one hundred and fifty years before B and Aleph were written, namely, Justin Martyr (c. 150), (History Of Modern Philosophy, Hoeffding, vol 1, pp. 472-484), Tatian (c. 175), (Idem, vol. 2, pp. 500 501), Irenaeus (c. 180), (The Origin Of Life, by A. I. Oparin, trans. by S. Morgulis, 2nd edition, New York: Dover, 1953, pp. 1-18), and Hippolytus (c. 200), (Idem, pp. 19-28. "On the Origin of Life," by John Keosian, Science, vol. 131 (1960), pp. 479-482). Thus the earliest extant testimony is on the side of these last twelve verses. Surely the critical objections against them must be exceedingly strong to overcome this evidence for their genuineness. This is a short evidence on this verses, I could give much more, but have given both references and only that which, I do hope will cause you to examine this further. Upon a study of those verses in Mark that have caused controversy, there will be found that believing scholars that hold those verses as genuine are more reasonable than scholars who are naturalist and reject them. Why were some omitted in those few manuscripts that do omit them could be accounted for by many reasons, yet up to this time no reason for any omission can explain satisfactorily how a hypothetical "lost ending" of Mark could have disappeared from all the extant New Testament documents or how the author of Mark's Gospel could have left it incomplete without any ending at all.Allow me to end this blog with these words of reflection: first, as to Bible versions: The culture of today, this modernistic, or post-modernistic culture has affected contemporary Christians so that the demand version that will please them, for they want version in their own idiom. It seems as though they want a Bible that will please them and speak to them as the speak with their friends. In other words, they want an informal God, a God who is no better educated than they themselves. They want a God with a limited vocabulary and a taste for modern slang. Slang words are tossed around today as though this is the way an intelligent person talks, maybe, who knows, they just may be unintelligent and use such phrases as "Hey dude!" The preference is one that has been united with modernistic ideologies, and they united with those modern versions of the Bible that will fit with those views; i.e., R.S.V. or N.E.B. or E.S.V., the N.I.V., or they opt for the T.E.V. or the Living Bible, the Message Bible, and so on.
The Bible version you use must not be a matter of indifference, a matter that you decide according to your whims or prejudices. You must take the time to examine and determine whether the version you use is the truth, the infallible word of God. To check things out is Biblical and if you believe that God is Providential, and does preserve His word as He has told us He would do, and you have not taken time to investigate this matter then all you have done is ignore God who is Providential and have chosen to adopt one of the modern versions that will lead you to take the first step in logic of unbelief. Notice this fact: the arguments that you use to justify your choice are the same arguments that unbelievers us to justify theirs, it is the same method. If you adopt one of these modern versions, you must adopt the naturalistic New Testament textual criticism upon which it rests. This naturalistic textual criticism requires us to study the New Testament text in the same way in which we study the texts of secular books which have not been preserved by God's special providence. In other words, naturalistic textual criticism regards the special, providential preservation of the Scriptures as of no importance for the study of the New Testament text. But if we concede this, then it follows that the infallible inspiration of the Scriptures is likewise unimportant. For why is it important that God should infallibly inspire the Scriptures, if it is not important that He should preserve them by His special providence?
Where did you ever get the idea that it is up to you to decide which Bible version you will receive as God's holy Word. As long as you harbor this false notion, you are little better than an unbeliever. As long as you cherish this erroneous opinion, you are entirely on your own. For you the Bible has no real authority, only that which your rebellious reason deigns to give it. For you there is no comfort no assurance of faith. Cast off, therefore, this carnal mind that leads to death! Put on the spiritual mind that leads to life and peace! Receive by faith the True Text of God's holy Word, which has been preserved down through the ages by His special providence and now is found in the Masoretic Hebrew text, the Greek Textus Receptus, and the King James Version and other faithful translations!
Take your stand with Christ and receive from His hands the True Text of Holy Scripture which He has preserved for you by His special providence. Then, armed with the sword of the Spirit and sheltered by the shield of faith, press on to victory.
HEAVEN AND EARTH SHALL PASS AWAY, BUT MY WORDS SHALL NOT PASS AWAY (Matt. 24:35).
In the way of righteousness
there is life;
along that path is
immortality.
Proverbs 12:28
Be A Truthful Witness For God
Richard L. Crumb
No comments:
Post a Comment