Before I look at Mr. Kurschner’s next reason, let me state why this is such an important topic. If we are to have utmost confidence – I am talking about
certainty – in God’s word, and especially His promises to us, it is necessary we have a Scripture that is trustworthy, not only in the main, but in the minutiae. Below we will talk about degrees of preservation – in “main” and “minutiae” – but for the moment I want to make clear that this is a vital issue for those who have an epistemological need for certainty of knowledge. Can I trust that the words of God I have are authentic, without loss or addition?
I thank those who have noted I should put this in blog form, and perhaps I will when I have time (this more precious than money!). Though my first priority, as regards to organizing all that I have written here at PB, and the booklet I wrote prior to coming here, would be to put it in book form, and make it available – I am thinking at this point for free, as an e-book in pdf. It is that I have a wife who needs my care, a church which needs it likewise, and a home and property which needs looking after (we are repairing and renovating so as to be able to sell it when it is time to return to the states, Lord willing). And I have another book (in the genre “visionary adventure, non-fiction”) I am working on.
I have saved (and will be regularly backing up!) all the posts I’ve written here, and those who find this material valuable ought to do the same. I think it appropriate to enter it as posts on threads here
at this time because these writings are read by many (and many PB non-members) and are interacting in real-time with capable opposition on these issues which are so crucial to many of us. I know they are rather long, some of them, but those who find them useful will bear with it for the gain.
This is Alan’s Reason #5 (5) Related to this last point is an interesting observation that myself and others have noticed about the most fundamental criticism that KJVO advocates make against modern textual criticism. They incessantly denounce that modern critics use “rational principles” in the utilization of determining better readings from inferior readings. And yet this is clearly a double standard given that the most fundamental principle that govern their thinking is a rational principle! In the mind of the KJVO advocates is the deep-seated rational conviction: "This is the way that God must have preserved his Word.” Notice that this is not a Biblical, historical, or textual argument—it is a rational argument. Somehow they believe that they are privy to God’s mind and can see this rational reason. And stemming from this fundamental rational reason is another rational reason: the majority principle. So what KJVO advocates criticize the most, is what they are essentially guilty of themselves! And to be sure, there is nothing wrong with rational thinking—I would hope that we do not approach God’s Word with irrational thinking. The question should be: is this or that rational principle applicable and warranted in this or that context?
It is not that this KJV advocate (notice I dropped the “Only” from this label) does not use reason. It is what my epistemological foundation is that matters. By that I mean, what presuppositions are operating in my worldview, and which inform my view of the Bible? First of all is, God has spoken, and revealed His heart, mind, and knowledge in written form so as to communicate these things to me. I have received true knowledge from Him. Because of what He has said, I believe that He created the world as He had revealed in the Book of Genesis. I believe His account of creation – including the creation of man and his fall – despite all supposed evidences and theories to the contrary.
Among the promises He has given to those who love Him and keep His covenant is that He would preserve His written word for them throughout the ages. In Matthew 4:4 the Lord Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” Does it not follow that what He said we must live by He would see to it we have? Has not “His divine power…given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness” (2 Peter 1:3)? When Jesus said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away” (Matt 24:35) was He referring to His words only being kept in Heaven, and not here on the earth where we need them desperately? Is not Isaiah 59:21 something that pertains to this issue:
As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
So whatever “rational principles” I have developed in my seeking to discern the preserved Biblical text stand upon principles of faith – specifically Biblical promises – which they are informed by and guided by. Yes, I use reason, but it stands upon faith. It does not stand upon so-called science, nor upon the “rational principle” that believes non-faith-based methods can be used to discern the true texts of Scripture. This method was developed by unbelieving German textual scholars (although some Roman Catholic scholars used this same method before them), who treated the Biblical manuscripts like any other secular manuscripts, disallowing any supernatural (not believing in the supernatural) influence upon them, either for good or for ill.
But unto the wicked God saith, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant in thy mouth? Seeing thou hatest instruction, and casteth my words behind thee. (Ps 50:16, 17)
How did God actually preserve His word? We will look at that when answering Mr. Kurschner’s remaining reasons. At this point, I want to make clear that I indeed will use my reason – rational principles, if you will – but they shall be guided by faith. In His word.