Hi Ken,
You said,
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK  Apparently, Erasmus and the Reformation era translators did not share the view that variant readings give us confidence in the organic inspiration of the scriptures.
Mr. Rafalsky, to be fair, are you aware of any scholarly works that refute the assertions of Cloud, Letis, Hills, Burgon etc? Or are they simply ignored? And if so, what reason do modern text critics give for their silence? |
You are correct in your first paragraph above, nor did
I espouse that view, it was only Bryan Chapell in your OP, and which has been the topic here. To my thinking such a view is an anomaly.
Actually Erasmus did personally accept some variants, but deferred to the "common readings" of the church (and not the RC) in his Greek editions.
And yes, there are those who attempt to refute the men you mention in your 2nd ¶.
I realize it is a laborious task, reading the arguments of one school, then the other, then comparing and weighing them. I was actually — it was around 1981 or 82 — about to spend my hard-earned $ on an NASB and separate like concordance, when I first heard the argument for the AV, so I held off and considered it. I already had a quality RSV & concordance (& other Bibles — along with my KJV), but I appreciated the arguments for the AV, and eventually held to it.
There is a remark attributed to Erasmus, "When I have a little money I buy books, and if there is anything left over I buy food, and clothing." That's how I conducted myself. Where some people save and buy homes, or cars, or guns, clothing, etc etc, I bought books. I said to myself, after Machen's saying, "I will not be held under 'the tyranny of experts'." There are so many apostate "expert" teachers, Greek and Hebrew scholars, even theologians! I was determined to have the scholarly resources and lexical tools to study and learn of things for myself.
I know that the view I espouse is in the minority today (it certainly was not in the Reformation and post-Reformation periods), but I am convinced of the position I hold. I continue to study the arguments of those who oppose me, 1st, so as to be ready for them, and 2nd, to be better able to interact intelligently with them, hopefully giving more light than heat. I am currently studying Dr. James White's arguments on the textual situation. I have even learned — and had to change some views — from opponents.
I may not have convinced you of the superiority of the TR 1894 / AV, but I am willing to share the information I have gathered and which I believe is in accord with the truth. A lot is at stake in this textual business. Language is my forte, and I see the decline in confidence in the language of the Bible — the very words of it — a distancing of the heart & mind from the heart and mind of God. The diminishing of this confidence is a slow, gradual process, like the growing of a great tree. There are trends that develop over the course of generations, over decades and even centuries. It is said that in the present is the seed — or embryo — of the future. The variants you brought up in your OP are like a cancer in the minds of many, even today. It was the
variants Rome used as a
weapon to try to subvert the Reformation, and its doctrines built on Sola Scriptura against the doctrine of "Sola Rome". And weapons they are! Arrows designed to foment doubt, and instill distrust. Such are deadly.
"A man is only as good as his word," the saying goes. It is patently obvious the
sure word of God is not that "good" anymore in the views of many. What we get by on, our grandchildren may not be able to rely on. "Has He really spoken," they may say, "and even if He has, have His words been preserved down to our day? The experts tell us the Scripture text is uncertain, we have a
general idea of what they are, and perhaps we can muster up a
general faith in them."
I have been asked to visit a Jordanian couple (Eastern Orthodox) a woman from church knows, who are experiencing poltergeist and other satanic-type phenomena on Friday. I'd
better have a sure confidence in my Lord and His word to mix in that stuff! [Prayer solicited, folks!]
At any rate, Ken, I will be praying for the Lord to give you wisdom and discernment in these matters. Since you seem to ask
close, detailed questions, perhaps the Burgon book I recommended,
The Revision Revised, will be the best to start with. Few and far between are those who even attempt to refute his assertions, so meticulous is his research, evidence, and argumentation. He covers the things you show interest in.
Steve