Greek Text at PRTS

[W.C. Dean]

Greetings. This question is for pastors or other seminarians who hold to the TR. I know the Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary is run by men who hold to confessional bibliology and use the TR, and this school is where I desire primarily to go for school. This issue is important to choosing a school in my opinion.

What text of Greek NT do they use at PRTS?

Is there any other accredited Reformed seminary that uses the TR?

Any resources to learn Greek and Hebrew from the TR and Masoretic text before seminary? I'd like to have a basis before I go to seminary.

Is it even important to learn Greek and Hebrew using the TR and Masoretic? (Compared to learning it with the eclectic text)

Thank you all.

 

[Stephen L Smith]

What text of Greek NT do they use at PRTS?

My understanding is that they use Scrivener's text produced by the Trinitarian Bible Society

 

[iainduguid]

Is it even important to learn Greek and Hebrew using the TR and Masoretic? (Compared to learning it with the eclectic text)

Thank you all.

Koine Greek is Koine Greek; the differences between the TR and the eclectic text are (relatively) small (though I understand why people might regard them as significant in theological terms). Think about it in terms of English. Suppose you learned English using the NKJV or the ESV (I chose those as roughly similar reading difficulty). Would it matter (in terms of learning English) which one you chose? Any differences would be marginal. In terms of Hebrew, the differences are so slight that I can't image you could tell where a particular verse came from.

Some grammars start you out of fake Biblish sentences anyway ("The soldier met the disciples and put them to the sword"). In fact, there is a Classical Hebrew Composition book by Jacob Weingreen that contains English paragraphs for you to translate into Hebrew that you would swear are from the Bible (KJV), if you didn't know better.

That's a very long answer: the short answer is, no it makes no difference. Far better to learn as much as you can of Greek and Hebrew (even if it is just the alphabet!) without worrying about text critical matters. You can tackle those in Greek and Hebrew 3.

 

[W.C. Dean]

Koine Greek is Koine Greek; the differences between the TR and the eclectic text are (relatively) small (though I understand why people might regard them as significant in theological terms). Think about it in terms of English. Suppose you learned English using the NKJV or the ESV (I chose those as roughly similar reading difficulty). Would it matter (in terms of learning English) which one you chose? Any differences would be marginal. In terms of Hebrew, the differences are so slight that I can't image you could tell where a particular verse came from.

Some grammars start you out of fake Biblish sentences anyway ("The soldier met the disciples and put them to the sword"). In fact, there is a Classical Hebrew Composition book by Jacob Weingreen that contains English paragraphs for you to translate into Hebrew that you would swear are from the Bible (KJV), if you didn't know better.

That's a very long answer: the short answer is, no it makes no difference. Far better to learn as much as you can of Greek and Hebrew (even if it is just the alphabet!) without worrying about text critical matters. You can tackle those in Greek and Hebrew 3.

Okay thank you. I should've thought about it in those terms. Obviously text criticism is something I would concern myself overall at a seminary but the basics of the language itself would be less of a concern.

 

[iainduguid]

Okay thank you. I should've thought about it in those terms. Obviously text criticism is something I would concern myself overall at a seminary but the basics of the language itself would be less of a concern.

Correct. And I wouldn't exaggerate the role of text criticism in an MDiv degree or subsequent pastoral ministry either. The big issue, obviously, is in the NT whether to favor the Textus Receptus or a critical text which includes readings from earlier manuscripts. That is an extensive debate that has many useful threads on this board. Your conclusion on this will (or should) have a major impact on which English Bible you choose to preach from. Once you have made that decision, as an ordinary pastor, how often will you deviate from your English translation, based on a text critical (rather than translational) issue? I hope the answer is almost never, except perhaps where there is a footnote in your translation advocating the reading you want to adopt. You want to build up people's confidence in their English Bibles that they are reading, not undermine it.

Text criticism is like plumbing. We should all be grateful to God that there are people whose calling it is to wrestle with the messy issues. Translators will obviously need to get their hands dirty on this topic. But not everyone needs to be a plumber - and even if you know how to do plumbing, you may well rely on others to do it for you (under your oversight) because you have better things to do with your time.

 

[Romans922]

Just remember that when you get to WSC 107,
Q. "What doth the conclusion of the Lord's Prayer teach us?"

A. [[The earliest and best MSS do not contain this verse.]]

Or you can remove a verse from WCF 2.3; WLC 6, 9; WSC 6. The verse isn't in Scripture, the divines were wrong.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

Just remember that when you get to WSC 107,
Q. "What doth the conclusion of the Lord's Prayer teach us?"

A. [[The earliest and best MSS do not contain this verse.]]

Outstanding! Ah, a word fitly spoken! How pleasant it is!

Just this week my wife, children and I have been memorizing the answer to the catechism's 107th (114th Baptist) question. It saddens me to think of those who have to nix this sweet portion of Scripture from their Bibles—and by extension, this question from their Catechism.

 

[Jake]

Here is a related thread from a couple of years ago: https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/prts-the-KJV.92852/

It appears they generally work with the KJV and a version of the TR, but some professors also hold to the Majority Text position and do criticism within it rather than being strictly TR-only.

 

[Hamalas]

And let me just say as a PRTS student that we really only deal with textual criticism in one 2-credit class called History and Preservation of the Bible (which deals with a whole lot more than just textual traditions). So it's something that you'll get here, but in a balanced and respectful way. Aside from that class, the only other place it pops up is in the use of the KJV in class/practice preaching (but the professors use various Bible translations and are open to students using different translations in your papers, etc...)

As Dr. Duguid so ably said, this really has no impact on learning the Greek and Hebrew. I would strongly recommend that you start by watching the videos on Daily Dose of Hebrew & Daily Dose of Greek. They have daily 2 minutes videos that they'll e-mail you walking through a verse (which is great practice) but I would start by working your way through their introductory teaching videos which will orient you to the alphabet, grammar, and basic syntax. (Just scroll down in the links below, they mention textbooks but you don't need them to benefit from the videos.)

40 Hebrew Lessons: http://dailydoseofhebrew.com/learn/

26 Greek Lessons: http://dailydoseofgreek.com/learn-biblical-greek/