ThomasCartwright
Puritan Board Freshman
I am attaching this file after receiving a number of private requests for some of my articles and papers on this subject. I appreciate some of Rev. Lane Keister’s plea for tolerance on this subject as I agree that it should not be the test of salvation. However, it is not correct that important doctrine is not at stake in the ongoing KJV/TR/MT debate. My contention is that the CT position has no Biblical foundation, no historical acceptance by the Church, and is outside the bounds of the historic Reformed Confessions. I believe I have a right to be concerned and dismayed when Reformed adherents are positing a position on the identification of the Words of the Canon that has no Biblical presuppositional support, is not found in history, and cannot be found in our Creeds. If I am wrong in this, then please adduce evidence to the contrary.
We must all reserve the right to define our lines of separation within the grounds of doctrine and not be carried along on the winds of Western religious pluralism. I appreciate much of what Rev. Lane Keister writes on a Biblical presuppositional position on inerrancy, inspiration, canonicity, creation but when he adopts a contradictory paradigm of epistemology for the text of the Canon based on neutral scientific rationalistic principles then I am entitled to point out this inconsistency.
I have divided this paper into three main sections:
(1) Reformers and Preservation
(2) BB Warfield’s Overturning of the Historic Position on Preservation
(3) Preservation Views Today
It is lengthy but I think all will accept that I have sourced it in a comprehensive manner, without necessarily accepting the conclusions that I draw. I have prepared another paper on the transmission of the text and presuppositions that I may submit at another time. I make no apology for stating I am a Fundamentalist Bible Presbyterian who is committed to the WCF and the perfect preservation in the original languages of all of God’s Words today and in all generations. Please note that I am not “KJVO” if that implies I am an English language preservationist as I have no Biblical presuppositions to drive me to that conclusion.
We must all reserve the right to define our lines of separation within the grounds of doctrine and not be carried along on the winds of Western religious pluralism. I appreciate much of what Rev. Lane Keister writes on a Biblical presuppositional position on inerrancy, inspiration, canonicity, creation but when he adopts a contradictory paradigm of epistemology for the text of the Canon based on neutral scientific rationalistic principles then I am entitled to point out this inconsistency.
I have divided this paper into three main sections:
(1) Reformers and Preservation
(2) BB Warfield’s Overturning of the Historic Position on Preservation
(3) Preservation Views Today
It is lengthy but I think all will accept that I have sourced it in a comprehensive manner, without necessarily accepting the conclusions that I draw. I have prepared another paper on the transmission of the text and presuppositions that I may submit at another time. I make no apology for stating I am a Fundamentalist Bible Presbyterian who is committed to the WCF and the perfect preservation in the original languages of all of God’s Words today and in all generations. Please note that I am not “KJVO” if that implies I am an English language preservationist as I have no Biblical presuppositions to drive me to that conclusion.
Last edited: