The Dean Burgon Society's 1994 Annual Meeting
Dr Robert Barnett, Vice President of
the Dean Burgon Society
Copyright 1999 by the author, reproduction and distribution rights assigned to the Dean
Burgon Society.
Introduction
I. His Infallibly
Inspired Bible will be preserved to all generations
II. Cannonicity Confirms our faith that we possess an
infallible Bible
III. Continuity Confirms the Received Text as our infallible
Bible
IV. Coherence in interpretation requires faith in the entire body
of God's infallibly inspired truth
Just days before his Lord called him home, our beloved, Dr. David Otis Fuller in his
last letter to me, dated February 5, l988, sealed his life testimony with these words of
conviction: "I am convinced beyond all doubt or question, THE MAIN AND MOST IMPORTANT
ISSUE BY FAR, FACING FUNDAMENTALISTS TODAY IS SUMMED UP IN TWO QUESTIONS:
1. "Do we have NOW (NOT in the
originals which have been lost for centuries and in my book is one of the worst cop-outs
anyone ever uttered). I repeat, do we have NOW the true, pure, inerrant, inspired,
Word of God as found in the King James Version?
2. "What kind of a God do we worship? If He
cannot or will not KEEP HIS WORD pure and true down through the ages right up to l988,
then we have one option left. "let us eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die
and go to hell."
How do we define infallibility? Infallible:
>1. not fallible; not capable of error;
never wrong.
>2. not liable to fail, go wrong, make a
mistake etc.; dependable; reliable.
>3. in the Roman Catholic Church,
incapable of error in setting forth doctrine on faith and morals; said especially of the
Pope speaking ex cathedra (i.e., in his official capacity).
-Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary, Unabridged, Second Edition.
There are but two tangible claims of God's infallible authority to the English speaking
world today. There is the authorized King James Bible interpreted by the Holy Spirit of
Truth, contrasted by the Roman Catholic Church with the Pope speaking ex cathedra.
I. The promises of
God assure us His Infallibly Inspired Bible will be preserved to all generations.
The Law
The secret [things belong] unto the LORD our God: but those [things which
are] revealed [belong] unto us and to our children for ever, that [we] may do all the
words of this law.
The Psalms
The words of the LORD [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of
earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation
for ever.
The Prophets
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.
The Lord Jesus Christ
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle
shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread
alone, but by every word of God.
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor
the power of God.
II. Cannonicity
Confirms our faith that we possess an infallible Bible as our standard of authority:
We continue to articulate our faith in an infallible Bible standard like our 17th
century ancestors. There was once a consensus of such faith expressed in Chapter #1
"Of the Holy Scriptures" in the 1658 Westminster Confession, the 1658 Savoy
Confession, and the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith:
Article #1: "The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and
infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience..." (Bold print
added for emphasis)
Therefore, we still claim to possess by faith the same infallible Holy Scriptures for
our certain sufficiency for all knowledge of salvation, faith, and daily obedience.
God promised us a perfect canon of scriptural knowledge:
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part
shall be done away.
What has come which is perfect in knowledge? Were this found in the masculine gender we
would have said it refers to Christ, but since it is in the neuter gender, it must surely
refer to the perfect canon of Holy Scripture.
5046 teleios, tel'-i-os; from 5056; complete (in various applications of labor, growth,
mental and moral character, etc.); neut. (as noun, with 3588) completeness:-of full age,
man, perfect.
This Canon, standard, or rule was revealed by God, distributed by God, and received by
man:
Note the definition of the word rule: 2583 kanon, kan-ohn'; from kane (a straight reed,
i.e. rod); a rule ("canon"), i.e. (fig.) a standard (of faith and practice); by
impl. a boundary, i.e. (fig.) a sphere (of activity):-line, rule.
Canon means: rule, order, formula, regulation, law, command.
Criterion: principle, standard, test.
a. This rule or canon has been revealed: But we will not
boast of things without [our] measure, but according to the measure of the rule which
God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you.
b. This Canon, standard, rule of God remains for us to walk or live by
daily: Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the
same
rule, let us mind the same thing.
c. This revealed Canon, standard, rule of God produces peace not
confusion. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace [be] on them,
and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.
Dr. David Fuller in the front cover of his book, True or False, quoted giants of
the past who defended every line of this canon: "All our hopes for eternity, the very
foundation of faith; our nearest and dearest consolations, are taken from us, if one line
of that sacred book (the Bible) be declared unfaithful or untrustworthy." (Excerpt
from Protest of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of England in united protest to
Bishop Colenso, l863).
Those textual critics found removing, adding, and changing words in the above received
canon of Holy Scriptures are not rightly dividing the word of truth.
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Rightly dividing 3718 orthotomeo, or-thot-om-eh'-o; from a comp. of 3717 and the base
of 5114; to make a straight cut, i.e. (fig.) to dissect (expound) correctly (the divine
message):-rightly divide.
Modern critical text Bibles have removed the equivalent of first and second Peter from
the New Testament. How many thousands of words, hundreds of phrases, and dozens of verses
must be removed before Christians awake to the evil nature of the problem?
Chick Salliby in his book, If The Foundations Be Destroyed, raised the question:
What does the New International Version of the Bible have against Jesus? Of the dozens of
doctrines of Christ attacked in the NIV, we shall mention but one. The deliberate
alterations of the names of our Lord Jesus Christ. On page 66 he list 135 examples where
the names of our Lord Jesus Christ are replaced contrary to the received text. Then he
tells us on page 67 how the NIV translators added 378 additional titles where the text did
not call for them. One of the most common was to place the name Jesus in place of a
pronoun or where no name was called for at all. Salliby's book is available from Word and
Prayer Ministries, P.O. Box 361, Fiskdale, MA 01518-0361.
The NIV translators have followed the corrupted texts of those who promoted adoptionism
by separating the names Jesus from Christ in an attempt to deny that Jesus was the Christ.
They promoted the heresy that Jesus became Christ at His baptism. By following these
corrupted critical texts of the adoptionists, the NIV translators have given support to
modern attacks upon the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. By adding 378 names of our Lord to
the NIV where the Greek text does not call for it, they even claim more wisdom and ability
than the Holy Spirit who gave the original words. They bring confusion and uncertainty to
a scriptural study of the names of God, and the deity of Jesus Christ..
Carl Graham in his pamphlet entitled The Proper Perspective on The Bible Sodomy and
the NIV gives evidence of how sodomy is removed from the NIV. Behind this change is
the influence of one of the literary consultants for the NIV translating committee who is
a professed homosexual. Dr. Virginia Ramey Mollenkott's own testimony from an interview in
the Episcopal publication, Witness (June, 1991, pages 20-23) is quoted: "The
interviewer, Sue Pierce, asked the question, 'Why was it important to both of you to come
out as lesbians?' Dr. Mollenkot's reply was, 'My lesbianism has always been a part of me.
I tried to kill myself in my teens because they told me I'd never be healed, that God had
no use for people like me. I couldn't stand the thought of living a life that was useless
and offensive to God. I tried to be heterosexual. I married myself off. But what I did
ultimately realize was that God created me as I was, and that this is where life was
meaningful.'"
Sodomites are removed from the NIV, and their sin of sodomy is covered. The word
"homosexual" is found one time in the NIV in , and there it can be
explained away as those who are homosexual offenders for attacking homosexuals. Carl
Graham gives examples of how Dr. Mollenkott has explained away in her books every
scripture against lesbianism or homosexuality in the Bible. Is this why some large
"evangelical" churches which promote the use of the NIV, refuse to speak out
publicly against sodomy? Is this why they have become weak on other sins also like
abortion and adultery? For copies of Graham's book write Carl Graham, 500 Wheeler Drive,
Angier, NC 27501.
Just as Sodomites use projectionism to remove their evil sins from modern Bible
translations, the feminists are changing male terms in the Bible which offend them to
neuter or female. Liberation Theology twists the Bible into a blueprint to force godless
Marxism upon nations. Even some fundamentalists believe the Bible translator has replaced
the expository ministry of the pastor/teacher. They believe the translator must not only
interpret the Bible message, but then he must transpose it down simple enough for every
reader to understand it. The pastor is then freed to concentrate on his fables.
().
Now let us further examine in their own words the critical textual apparatus already
established and used by the United Bible Society's The Greek New Testament, edited
by Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Bruce M. Metzger, and Allen Wikgren in 1966; Initiated,
organized and administered by Eugene A. Nida:
"By means of the letters A, B, C, and D, enclosed within "braces" { } at
the beginning of each set of textual variants, the Committee has sought to indicate the
relative degree of certainty, arrived at on the basis of internal considerations as well
as of external evidence, for the reading adopted as the text. The letter A signifies that
the text is virtually certain, while B indicates that there is some degree of doubt. The
letter C means that there is considerable degree of doubt whether the text or the
apparatus contains the superior reading, while D shows that there is a very high degree of
doubt concerning the reading selected for the text" -Page x,xi.
The above system produced an eclectic Greek text which was the primary critical Greek
text used as a basis for the translation of the New Testament of the New International
Version. Almost all modern versions follow some form of this same critical Westcott and
Hort eclectic text type. Most altered and omitted verses in the NIV and other modern
versions rest primarily upon the vote of Greek scholars who followed the system described
above.
Claiming to follow the above tradition one of the latest bibles produced by critical
text scholars is The Scholars Version entitled The Five Gospels. It is a new translation
and commentary by Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and The Jesus Seminar. It is printed by
Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. "The Scholars Version is authorized by
scholars." -Page xviii. They claim to follow the rules and principles of textual
criticism laid down during the past 200 years. They add a 5th gospel of Thomas to their
bible. They also deny 82% of the words attributed to our Lord Jesus Christ. They are
currently working on who the real father of Jesus Christ was. Do I have to suggest to you
what the goal of such blasphemy is?
There can be no certain rule or canon for those who follow the critical text scholars.
From the worst to the best they deliberately alter the infallible canon of truth God
reveal to us.
III. Continuity
Confirms the Received Text as our infallible Bible authority.
Continuity is required not only by the promises of God, and the self-authenticating
cannon of Holy Scripture, but also by the consistent witness of the Holy Spirit leading
Bible believers generation by generation.
Listen again to our 17th century Baptist forefathers:
Article #5 "...our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth,
and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness
by and with the Word in our hearts." (Bold print added for emphasis)
Therefore, we must still be possessed by the same infallible Holy Spirit of Truth who
alone brings us full assurance of the infallible authority of God's Holy Scripture within
our hearts.
In contrast, those who follow the critical text approach of Westcott and Hort believe
the original autographs were corrupted early making necessary a 4th century Syrian
Recension which they believe perpetuated an eclectic corrupted text by believers in the
Churches. Therefore, they cannot believe in a preserved infallible Bible, and could not
prove any claims to infallibility for any Bible they now possess or may yet construct.
Recent discovery of early textual evidence has proven their 19th century presuppositions
to be in error.
Those who follow the new Greek majority text crowd believe God for some reason stopped
Bible preservation at the time of the printing press. They believe we must examine all the
existing hand written Greek manuscripts available up to that time to rediscover the most
accurate New Testament. They can neither claim infallibility for any Bible they now
possess or prove it is superior to the Received Text.
God's promises of Bible Preservation require generation by generation preservation. Let
us examine the evidence of this historical continuity of the Received Text: Dr. D. A.
Waite in his book The King James Bible's Superiority, lists 37 historical evidences
supporting the Received text and King James Bible. He said The received text was used by:
(l) All the Apostolic Churches, (2) the Churches in Palestine, (3) the Syrian Church at
Antioch, (33-100 A.D.); (4) The Peshitta Syriac Version, l50 A.D., (5) Papyrus #75, (6)
The Italic Church in Northern Italy, l57 A.D., (7) The Gallic Church of Southern France,
(l77) A.D., (8) The Celtic Church in Great Britain, (9) The Church of Scotland and
Ireland, (l0) The Pre-Waldensian Church, (ll) The Waldensian, l20 A.D. onward, (The Early
Church Period l00-3l2); (12) The Gothic Version of the 4th century, (13) Codex W of
Matthew in the 4th or 5th century, (14) Codex A in the Gospels in the 5th century, (15)
The vast majority of extant New Testament manuscripts, (16) The Greek Orthodox Church,
(17) The present Greek Church, (The Byzantine Period (312--1453 A.D.); (18) All the
churches of the Reformation, (19) The Erasmus Greek New Testament (15l6), (20) The
Complutensian Polyglot (1522), (21) Martin Luther's German Bible (1522). (22) William
Tyndale's Bible (l525), (23) The French Version of Oliveton (l535), (24) The Coverdale
Bible (l535), (25) The Matthews Bible (1537), (26) The Taverners Bible (l539), (27) The
Great Bible (l539-4l), (28) The Stephanus Greek New Testament (l546-5l), (29) The Geneva
Bible of (l557-60), (30) The Bishops' Bible (l568), (3l) The Spanish Version (l569), (32)
The Beza Greek New Testament (l598), (33) The Czech Version (1602), (34) The Italian
Version of Diodati (l607), (35) The King James Bible (1611), (36) The Elziver Brothers'
Greek New Testament (1624), and (37) "The Received Text in the New Testament is
the Received Text--the text that has survived in continuity from the beginning of the New
Testament itself. It is the only accurate representation of the originals we have
today!" -D. A. Waite, Th.D., Ph.D., The King James Bible's Superiority, Pages
4l-45.
Dr. Waite followed the above historical evidence with the following position of faith:
"In fact, it is my own personal conviction and belief, after studying this subject
since l97l, that the words of the Received Greek and Massoretic Hebrew texts that underlie
the KING JAMES BIBLE are the very WORDS which God has PRESERVED down through the
centuries, being the exact WORDS of the ORIGINALS themselves. As such, I believe they
are INSPIRED WORDS. I believe they are PRESERVED WORDS. I believe they are
INERRANT
WORDS. I believe they are INFALLIBLE WORDS. This is why I believe so strongly that
any valid translation MUST be based upon these original language texts, and these
alone!" I concur l00% with this statement. One must either place faith in the
operation
of the Holy Spirit through the people of God in the churches down through the centuries,
or trust the conflicting opinions of critical scholars of the l9th and 20th
centuries.
IV. Coherence in
interpretation requires faith in the entire body of God's infallibly inspired truth.
Receiving infallible truth from our authorized King James Bible comes not as much from
boring holes into the underlying Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek as from comparing scripture
with scripture under the leading of the Holy Spirit. While even unsaved linguists and
modernists can do the former, only a born-again believer can do the latter. Listen again
to our forefathers:
Article #9 "The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture
itself; and therefore when there is a question about the true and full sense of any
Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched by other places that speak
more clearly." (Bold print added for emphasis)
Therefore, we must still possess the infallible rule of Scripture interpretation which
comes by searching and studying the Holy Scriptures alone as self-instructing and
interpreting.
A. We must believe in the infallible
Inspired original autographs as the foundation from which the apographs came. But we
cannot claim infallibility for just the original autographs since no such Bible ever
existed in one copy at one time on planet earth.
"Let us look at some undisputed facts about the originals. First: there never was
a book of the 66 originals of the Bible. Second: there never was a book of the 39
originals of the old Testament. Third: There never was a book of the 27 originals of the
New Testament. Fourth: no one living or dead ever saw the 66, 39 or 27 originals. Fifth:
each of the originals were lost, worn out, destroyed or gone within l00 to l50 years of
their writing. Sixth: the originals were written over a period of about l600 years from
the first book Job to the last one Revelation. Seventh: the originals were written a
distance of l500 to 2000 miles apart from each other. Eighth: the originals were written
in at least three different languages. Ninth: the originals were written on any number of
kinds of material, with any number of kinds of writing fluid. Tenth: the originals under
God's will and guidance incorporate many kinds of culture and background. Eleventh: no
version in existence today was or is translated from any original. Twelfth: no one living
today would know or recognize any one of the 66 originals if they saw one. And on and on
and on. Therefore, in the light of the above to flee to the supposed sanctuary of the
originals is unreal, hypocrisy, a fetish, and worse than the proverbial ostrich hiding its
head in the sand and thinking it is covered and out of sight." -Dr. Ralph I.
Yarnell,
A Fresh Look At The King James Bible, page 33,34.
B. God never intended His people to place
their faith in the originals alone. The first originals of the law were broken and
destroyed by Moses. () It was through the second tables hewed by Moses that
God restored His words. The Jews never possessed the originals in the ark of the covenant.
These were apographs or copies of the originals.
EXO 34:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the
first: and I will write upon [these] tables the words that were in the first tables, which
thou brakest.
C. The book of Jeremiah was never
available for a completed canon of scriptures. And it came to pass, [that] when
Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast [it] into the
fire that [was] on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that [was] on
the hearth. Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words
that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned.
One cannot deny or ignore the infallibility of the original autographs or the centuries
of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek apographs underlying the authorized King James Bible, and
honestly claim infallibility for any other tangible Bible today. While it is essential
that we defend the historical canon and continuity of our Bible as found in the original
autographs and accurate apographs, it is equally essential that we defend the coherence of
the entire body of infallible truth from the originals, through the apographs, into our
own authorized King James Bible. To discredit the originals, apographs, or the KJB is to
undermine God's infallible authority to the English speaking world.
By faith I believe like the late Dr. David Otis Fuller that, "we have NOW
the true, pure, inerrant, inspired, Word of God as found in the King James Version!. I do
not believe the KJB translators were inspired, neither were the English words they used. I
do believe by faith that the KJB derives its inspiration, its inerrancy in doctrine, and
its infallible body of authority from the accurately translated apographs of the original
autographs of Holy Scriptures which underlie the KJB. The KJB is inspired, not directly,
but derivatively. That is, the English words received God's breath from the original
Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek words. The KJB is inspired, not perfectly, but practically. It
is inspired in the "logos", but not the "rhema". Because of language
differences verbatim inspiration is sometimes limited, the translators added italicized
words to help compensate for this difference. It is more accurate to say the KJB possesses
virtual inspiration rather than verbatim inspiration. Again we are not referring to the
English letters and words as inspired, but rather the eternal truth or logos communicated
by these words into the English language as the inspired, living, breathing truth of God.
Therefore, we believe by faith this same infallibly inspired truth has continued from the
original God-breathed Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into our authorized King James Bible,
thereby empowering it as God's infallible truth to the English speaking world. This
resulted in an infallible canon of truth, through which the infallible Spirit of Truth can
lead the English speaking Bible-believers unto all truth. I do not believe a strong faith
in the divine accuracy and authority of the authorized KJB can be built up among people in
the pews where its authority is discredited or denied from the pulpit. Within the above
context, I believe we have every right to call the KJB God's inspired English Scriptures.
Today, the English language is respected in business and science internationally as a
universal or global language. By combining God's original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into
the highest form of this universal English language, the authorized KJB is without
question the most precise and powerful single book upon planet earth today!
This is the only infallible rule of interpretation which can protect our English
speaking churches from doctrinal misinterpretations of the original languages. As the
apostle Paul said: These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that
they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily,
whether those things were so.
This coherent rule of translation was first observed in Acts 2 as the Holy Spirit
enabled every man to hear God's word in his own language:
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in
Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about
Cyrene, and
strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works
of God.
This principle of Bible translation is clearly extended to all nations in the great
commission to the gentiles in . Verse 25 reminds us first of the preaching
of the gospel, and then verse 26 commands us to make the scriptures available to
"...all nations for the obedience of faith". Bible translations are an urgent
part of God's plan and program for reaching the world.
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the
preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept
secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of
the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all
nations for the obedience of faith:
Our English forefathers believed their authorized King James Bible was infallible.
Theodore P. Letis in his book, THE MAJORITY TEXT; Essays and Reviews in the Continuing
Debate, quoted Woodbridge and Balmer as admitting: "It is true that in the
seventeenth century a good number of Christians esteemed that the Bibles they had in their
hands were infallible." It was not until the advent of naturalistic textual criticism
that men began to seriously question the infallibility of the Bibles they held in their
hands.
Let us listen to this last Bible Conference testimony by the prince of preachers, C. H.
Spurgeon in his Final Manifesto, printed in April, l89l. (He died in January,
l892). "If this book be not infallible, where shall we find infallibility? We have
given up the Pope, for he has blundered often and terrible; but we shall not set up
instead of him a horde of little popelings fresh from college. Are these correctors of
Scripture infallible? Is it certain that our Bibles are not right, but that the critics
must be so?" While we cannot read the mind of C.H. Spurgeon, we know he was preaching
from the authorized King James Bible, and we know his listeners possessed authorized King
James Bibles.
The Helveticus Consensus of l675 assumed a canon of Holy Scripture from God which
assured an infallible authority. "God, the supreme Judge, not only took care to have
his word, which is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, committed
to writing by Moses, the prophets, and the apostles, but has also watched and cherished it
with paternal care ever since it was written up to the present time, so that it could not
be corrupted by craft of Satan or fraud of man."
The Baptist Philadelphia Confession of l742 repeated on these shores the same
profession of faith found in England a century earlier among the Presbyterians,
Congregationalists, and Baptists: "The Old Testament in Hebrew, (which was the Native
language of the people of God of old) and the New Testament in Greek, (which at the time
of the writing of it was most generally known to the Nations) being immediately inspired
by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore
authentical; so as in all controversies of Religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto
them." Our forefathers were assured that their Bible was infallible authority because
it was based upon the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew, and the Greek Textus Receptus
originally given by God and preserved by His divine providence.
Having preached through every verse of the Bible currently called into question by
naturalistic textual critics, I have personally experienced the promise of Jesus in
: "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of
God, or whether I speak of myself." The Spirit of Truth bears witness with my spirit
that every one of these verses is from God. This subjective testimony is no valid proof to
convince others, but it gives complete peace and assurance within. I would challenge every
Born-again, Bible-believing person to give the Spirit of Truth a chance before you listen
to the unbelief of textual critics. I firmly believe you will discover that you now
possess each of God's infallibly inspired scriptures within your own English KJB.
|
