Questions About the Bible (03/18/2001)

Psalm 12 and the Preservation of God’s Word

Turn with me to Psalm chapter 12 verse 6 if you would this morning. We're going to continue our study on Bibliology what the Bible says about the Bible and if you haven't been with us for the previous sessions We will have outlines available for this whole thing so you can pick them up.

Don't have them this morning. But before this little series On the Bible is over. We'll have those for you. This material is quite Detailed. Probably more than most would think that a pastor would bring to his congregation but I feel that since we are in the end times and Since Amos chapter 8 and verse 12 Says that in the end times men will wander Sea to sea from the north to the east and they will go to and fro to seek the Word of God.

But they shall not find it. I think it makes it particularly important for us to go ahead and cover this in detail especially for our young people who If the Lord tarries a while may find themselves in a world where there aren't as many Bibles as you see today.

And it may even have a different meaning it may mean there are more Bibles than you see today. But they're all different Confused versions and you don't know which one has the Word of God in it and you're not sure where to look.

I Will say this that any version that you pick up has 90 of the Word of God in it. If it didn't they wouldn't be calling it a Bible so that is true and there will be people who will tell you that a study like this is totally unimportant because all of the great doctrines are in all the versions and you can find them there and I would have to disagree with them because Jesus said if there be a little leaven at leaven if the whole lump and My thinking is that when the Antichrist comes he'll probably be quoting from Scripture.

And he would love to quote the ones that had been changed the 10 that is different in the different versions. That's where he'd like to quote so it makes it important for us because it deals with the truth the very Word of God the written Word and The Bible says clearly that the Lord has elevated that even above his own name, which is an amazing verse if you think about it.

Why the Lord would do that, but he has done. So now he's made us some promises and some Chapter 12 in verse 6 and 7 the words of the Lord are pure words as silver tried in a furnace of earth. Even though the furnace of earth pictures the men that God used to give us the Word of God the human beings.

Fallible human beings that's pictured by the earth. He still says that is purified seven times that pictures God's hand. Man cannot thwart God man cannot thwart God's purposes and it is God's purpose look shown in verse 7.

Thou shalt keep them. Oh Lord thou shalt preserve them from this generation. Forever that is God's purpose and no man is able to thwart that you can see other verses that That talk about this in the book of Psalms chapter 18 verse 30 Says as for God his way is perfect.

The Word of the Lord is tried. He is a buckler to all them that trust in him. Chapter 19 in verse 8 the statutes of the Lord are right. Rejoicing the heart the commandment of the Lord is pure. Enlightening the eyes and many other promises that we've studied throughout this study that we've been doing for quite some weeks.

Psalm 119 152 Psalm 119 89 Matthew 24 35 1st Peter 1 23 and Others all teach the fact that not only has God given us the inspired word He has promised to preserve it through each generation. We'll be coming back to this verse in Psalm chapter 12 verse 7 as we end this study in a week or at the most two from now and we will probably Resolve the whole matter based on that verse.

Manuscript Evidence: Uncials, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus

Last time if you remember we started talking about The Evidences that we have the manuscripts that are still in existence on the face of the earth the first Roman numeral in this particular study. Were those called the unseals?

And if you remember those are called that because they are written in all caps in the Greek Lettering now we're predominantly speaking of the New Testament. The Old Testament is a whole different matter.

It is not debated nearly as much. The Masoretic text is considered by most all people to be the Word of God Today and to be very accurate because of the scribes the Hebrew scribes. We know some of their practices we know how when a Scripture or a group of scriptures would become tattered and and too old to use anymore they would copy it and then bury the old one and They took such great care, but there is some debate on the New Testament.

So we're primarily dealing with New Testament manuscripts Greek Manuscripts Latin manuscripts and so forth. So the unseals are the first group we started talking about. There are about a hundred and forty copies of these plus.

Some new ones that are in existence now that were not there when I first did my study on this back in 1981 or two or three about 83. There are about 70 new ones that have been discovered since that time.

There's a book by Kurt Alland, which is one of the better books today that will Document for you all the manuscripts and collate them under the different groupings. Very interesting book. And he seems to be one of the more neutral people and and I don't know if anybody's completely neutral.

But if there is one who is this man seems to be very neutral. It's as if he doesn't care which theories, right? He just wants to show you the evidence. He brings out the evidence and he leaves it up to others to fit it into theories and that's good because you can go straight.

And just get the evidence from some of his books. These unseals are listed a through Z. Although not all the letters are used J R and Z are not used but they may be someday as they make new discoveries.

And then there are unseal fragments that are listed as oh four six. Oh four seven. Oh four eight. Oh two five oh, etc. Then we talked about. Last time the most famous of the unseals is called the Vaticanus which is given the letter capital B.

Those are capital letters, by the way, the a through Z or capital letters. It's given the capital letter B. It was dated back to about 350 to 370 ad they don't know the exact dates they try to use carbon dating and different things to date them and also, they have Writing specialists that can look at the lettering they can look at different things to do with the paper or in this case the vellum animal skin and Date given approximate date.

So that's the approximate date 350 to 370 ad a very ancient manuscript. In fact last time we began to discuss this manuscript. It's been called by different scholars as quote the most perfect Greek manuscript quote remarkably pure.

Quote beautifully preserved and quote highly legible. Yet it's interesting to point out that this Most perfect remarkably pure beautifully preserved highly legible document was found in the Vatican Library in the year 1481 apparently had not been used up till that point and it does not Contain the entire of Genesis 1 1 through Genesis 46 28.

So there is no fall of man found in this Bible. It does not contain the middle of the heart of the Bible Psalm 106 through Psalm 138. It does not contain any of the pastoral epistles which teach us how a church ought to be run.

Nor does it have anything beyond Hebrews 9 15 in the book of Hebrews? It has everything up to that but not beyond that because at that point and on it begins to talk about Jesus as the high priest and it would totally do away with the Roman Catholic sacraments and it does not have any of the book of Revelation.

Now this happens to be the manuscript that Westcott and Hort Have chosen to be called what they call the neutral text and they always where they would make changes in the Bible. They would go back to this text and say that this one was the authoritative text.

And yet we see that it has been had all of these books cut out of it for a reason. And when we find it in the Vatican Library, and we understand that no Protestant Scholar has ever been allowed to lay eyes on this manuscript.

All they've ever seen are photographs of it. We start to wonder why these particular parts of the Bible are missing from this manuscript if it is Remarkably pure and beautifully preserved which it is.

It's on vellum, which is sheepskin and it's all there except for these it's not like these rotted and went away. They were never put in this Bible. And yet this is the one that the whole Westcott Hort theory and all of your modern versions other than the King James Bible in the English language all of the modern versions have come from a Greek manuscript that was Redone and redesigned by Westcott and Hort in favor of this Vaticanus manuscript.

There are many problems with this theory and your pastor does not hold to it. But most scholars today do and most preachers in fact do. Which I think is sad. It's interesting because this battle was really fought back in the 1800s and I believe it was won predominantly by a man named Burgeon.

You can go back and read his works and Read the works of Westcott Hort read the works of Virgin and you decide who makes the most sense. I've done that on my own and you can do that as well. So I don't really think it has to be reargued today except for the fact that there have been new findings.

What's amazing is the things that burgeon said back in his days in the 1800s? Have never been proven wrong even by new findings. One of the things that he said is he said I am NOT a defender of the received text.

Now in case you're here for the first time or hadn't been following us the received text is also called the textus receptus and It is the Greek line of manuscripts that the King James came from. In fact, it's the line of manuscript Use me manuscripts that most Bibles Starting from the time of Westcott and Horton going back.

They mostly were all made from that and that's why it was called the received text. It was the one that received by all people. Well Westcott and Hort changed all that and made over 5 ,000 changes in the New Testament alone To the received text and made those changes predominantly based on this unseal called Vaticanus.

Questions on Inspiration, Preservation, and Counterfeit Texts

We came to the place last time where We asked some questions and I asked you to do some homework and you've had two weeks. So I want to see if any of you did if you're like me you forgot to do it. So you better scramble and come up with some verses right quick so you can give me some answers.

Well, I want to go back over these questions that we asked the first one was this did God author and inspire the Bible and I asked you to find some scriptures to prove that. The second question was would God inspire a text and then lose it?

The third question was if God would inspire text would he then preserve it for all generations? The fourth question was would he preserve it through men who did not believe that he inspired it now think about that one.

In the fifth question, would there be any counterfeits of the preserved text circulating around the world? If the answer that one is yes, then the sixth question is what kind of men would these come from and The seventh question is how could you tell the difference if there are counterfeits?

And the eighth question is does God bear witness to a preserved text or must you go to seminary to find it? Now, how did you do with these questions? Let me ask you this. Can anyone share with me a scripture or Our two that would answer question number one did God author and inspire the Bible what does it say.

I suppose it could. I never thought of it that way, but it certainly could because Jesus is the Hebrews chapter 1 verses 1 through 3 would bear that out brother bill because it says in the former days He spoke through the prophets of old but in these last days.

He hath spoken by his son. Anybody give me another one. What's the most famous one? Just kind of paraphrase unless, you know, the whole thing the man of God may be thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

So that one says all that's first or second to me. Always for is it second Timothy? I get them backwards to second Timothy 316. You guy remember the 316 parts like John 316. But that is a very important verse because where it says inspired in the in the Greek language.

It is literally God breathed all scripture is God breathed. So that that would definitely prove that point number one is true. God did inspire the Bible. It is not man is not the author of it. God is.

So that brings us to the second question. Would God inspire a text and then lose it who would have an answer for me there? Could he lose it? Don't you think the verse we read starting the sermon out this morning would prove that one?

It says he would preserve it to how many generations? Throughout all generations. So if he inspired it and he then promised to preserve it, could he lose it? Could it be lost on the face of the earth?

Could there be any generation that had lost it from the time of the Apostles? Well We'll look at that a little closer later on in the study. What about the third question. If God would inspire it would he preserve it?

Well, we kind of answered that so let's go to the fourth one. Would he preserve it through men who did not believe that he inspired it? What's your answer there. Well, I don't know that there's a verse for that one.

Unless someone found one. Okay. That would kind of indirectly. What about the one in in first Peter? I believe it's in first Peter where it says that The prophets gave us the word as oh man, I've lost the verse.

As the Lord oh How does that thing go. You know what I'm talking about. Let me look it up. Got too much active fed in my head this morning. See now I'm having to do your homework for you, it's not fair.

You'll find it before I do. Well, I'm not gonna try anymore. I'm gonna waste our time, but It speaks of the fact that the Holy Spirit's that the Here it is. My hands right on it second Peter 1 20 and 21 knowing this first that no prophecy of the scriptures of any private Interpretation for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man.

But holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. That verse along with Deborah's indirectly talk about it, but not directly. The fact is the answer number four. It is true that God sometimes will use evil people even to fulfill his will.

Wouldn't you agree with that? There are examples in the Bible where he's used Prostitutes to save his spies. There are times in the Bible where he used evil people or people who were doing evil things to To accomplish his will such as the Pharaoh in Egypt.

He was exactly in the middle of God's will and there wasn't a thing he could do about it. And it says in some places that God hardened his heart to accomplish his will. Other places it says he hardened his own heart, which is also true.

So It could be possible that God would use ungodly men from time to time through history to Preserve it even men who didn't believe he inspired it, but I think that's I. Would I would have to say this?

I don't think the predominance of the people that were involved with the copying of the scriptures were ungodly. I think the predominance of them were godly people and That's why the predominance of the text agree with one another and with the received text.

The fifth question would there be any counterfeits of the preserved text circulating around the world who would answer that one? To promote false doctrine. Yes Satan's ministers appear as ministers. Righteousness is a good verse.

How about 2nd Corinthians 2 17 where all the way back even in the time when the Bible was still being? Pinned the Apostle Paul said for we are not as Many which corrupt the Word of God. Can you believe that that the corruptions were beginning to pay take place even before the canon was put together in one book?

So even in Paul's day for 2nd Corinthians 2 17 proves that people were already corrupting the Word of God the scriptures. So yes, there were counterfeits Circulating around the world dating all the way back to the first century.

In fact, most of the Worst corruptions that have happened to the New Testament happened the first 100 years. Isn't that amazing. Are certainly within the first 200 years? What kind of men would these corruptions come from would you think?

Corrupt men. Right corrupt men who are corrupters. Well usually from men who want to prove a certain doctrine. That is a fallacy. Are you familiar with Arianism? What is Arianism teach in a nutshell we need to know this.

I've forgotten some hoping you'll remember now. What is what is Arianism? It was one of the earliest heresies. Come on, somebody tell me. We had one up we had an Arian come to our door yesterday. I'll give you a hint.

We had one dressed in a suit come to our door yesterday and give Give my dad and and my daughter. Some material and Ben came. He said look dad some books about Jesus Arians brought him. No. That's the other one Jehovah's Witnesses.

Now. What did Jehovah's Witnesses believe that's predominantly different than what we believe? No, no. No, I mean the main thing. There's a there's a hundred things you start listing them. We'd go on all day.

You're right. I mean that's that proves them wrong right there. But what's what's the predominant? Worst heresy. Jesus is not God. Jesus is not God. Who is he to to the Arian? He's a he's Lucifer's brother.

He's Satan's brother. The Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the Mormons believe it but they did not invent it. It was invented in the first century by Aries. Well, I won't say it was invented in the first century but the thought was already there in areas made it popular.

And that's why it's called Arian heresy and So this has been Battled out from the very beginning that one of the earliest corruptors of the scripture I believe was a man named origin who? Created a book that had four columns in it and each one had different versions of the Greek and He quote corrected the Bible.

But what's interesting is origin was an Arian who did not believe Jesus was God and in a moment when we reach from some of The modern versions I've passed a couple out to the congregation so you can help me read from them you're going to find very clearly that the biggest changes that you'll find in the Greek Testament is is a Hit against the deity of Christ and you'll find it again and again and again and again or it's against the version virgin birth.

Or the fact that he's the only begotten son and call him the son and leave the word begotten off. Again, and again and again and again not just once or twice but again and again and again again. And you say well 90 you can still find the virgin birth in these modern Bibles.

Yeah, you can you can and you can still find that Jesus is God. That's true. You can but why is it so many verses? They've taken it out of the verses and Provided verses that someone could use were they an Arian they could use these verses in fact.

Some of the greatest proofs that we have that Jesus is God have been changed in all of your modern Bibles because they go back to the Vaticanus and to the Westcott court text, which we believe I personally believe goes all the way back to origin and Where he made the four columns and he was an Arian and I believe some of that Arian heresy has come down through these Manuscripts to the modern versions today, and I think we'll be able to prove that before this study is over.

So what kind of men with these changes come from it would come from men who wanted to prove a point. That's not in the real Bible. So they just change it. The New World Translation is a great example.

That's a Jehovah's Witness Bible. I've got one at home and They ever offer you one. If they try to offer you material say no, I don't want that I'd like one of your Bibles. Could I have one of your Bibles and get one of them and you can go through and you Can check these birds like John 1 1 you ought to read that one in a New World Arian translation.

It's totally different than what your Bible says so These things are not new they've happened all the way back from the first and second century. These kinds of changes have been made by people who were trying to distort the doctrines of the Bible.

Textual Criticism and the Limits of Comparing Ancient Manuscripts

Now let me throw this out at you because we're gonna hit this two or three times. It's the crux of the whole matter when it comes to deciding the different theories on which line of manuscripts is correct the modern Philosophy and it's interesting because while we were there last week I took a one of the classes offered had to do with how to choose a Translation and the man who taught it Was one of the translators of the New American Standard.

I was impressed that they would have him there. It was really impressive to see this man and hear him speak. He was one of the actual translators Who went to the Greek and the Hebrew and brought it back into the English in the New American Standard?

What's interesting though some people ask him some questions. He couldn't answer he answered them but he had some difficulty in answering them and because he is a believer of the old idea that the Westcott Hort theory is correct and He Believes that you can use modern textual criticism to determine which manuscript we should use.

The problem with that is this. Dean Burgin back in the 1800s wrote a beautiful argument against this idea. He said you cannot use the same methods that you use to criticize an ancient manuscript of Homer or even of Shakespeare.

Because the difference is in the New Testament. There are doctrines that people change on purpose because they don't want to believe those doctrines. Whereas with Shakespeare and Homer nobody cares. There's no doctrinal beliefs that anybody would have any reason to change.

So you can go with the idea that the oldest manuscript of Homer is probably closer to the accurate to the original. Because it's closer to it. But that does not always hold true with the Bible because the oldest manuscript you find May be found in a Vatican library and may be an Aryan document, even though the Roman Catholics are not Aryan.

The Aryan manuscript that it came from probably back from origin was certainly Aryan. And so your oldest one might not be the best one depending on where you found it so you cannot use the same arguments in in Judging the manuscripts of the scriptures that you could with an ancient book of secular origin.

And I believe Dean Burgin was absolutely right about that. I don't believe anyone's ever Used better reasoning than he did when he made his argument back in the 1800s. About the time he was arguing against Westcott and Hort when they when they put their work out.

All right. How could we know the difference between a counterfeit and the real thing? That's a difficult question. That's a very difficult question. Because you have different theories and good men believe both theories even today.

How could you know the difference. Well, that's what this whole discussion is about. So why don't we hold that one off till the end? We'll see if we can come to a conclusion on that. In a verse the eighth question was more To be funny than anything else.

Do you have to go to seminary to be able to tell the difference? I really don't think you do. I think here's what I and Dean Burgin said this and I don't have the quote with me, but it's in the Next Sunday's sermon if we get through all of this one.

It may be Sunday after next but I've got it in that those notes not in these a quote from him is so beautiful. What he points out is that when you have a version of the Bible that's been around for several generations.

Like the King James Version and been used of God in revivals with over 10 million people that we know made professions of faith through Billy Sunday through Spurgeon through Whitfield all of the great revivals you've ever heard of in history came from the received text.

At least that's the Bible that was being preached at the time. They happened we know they came from the Holy Spirit not from there not from the actual paper, but The Word of God together with the Holy Spirit is what made it happen.

Now what's interesting about it? Is that? Since the received text was used so often the English mind has word formulas in it that come from that text and when a preacher gets up to preach and in the middle of his sermon he quotes a fragment of a verse or a part of A verse that really draws bearing on the subject.

It makes your heart sing out if you're a Christian I mean just hearing a part of that verse where it fits into the text so well and you go Amen, and it just sings out from your heart when you begin to change those old familiar word formulas to modern English.

It reads like a comic book it does not do the same thing for the heart and Dean Burgeon eloquently argued that point that even beyond the Accuracy of the manuscript. We probably shouldn't be changing the King James because those word formulas have been burned into our hearts for so many generations.

That when you begin to change them, then the preachers have to start all over. Creating new word formulas and you lose a lot in the preaching and I agree with him on that. Although I wouldn't say that's the strongest argument.

It is certainly an argument now. Let's go on into this this morning. We have a little bit more time left. We start out. We're talking about the unseals. The first one we discussed is the Vaticanus or the B the second great one that we would read about In this category is called the Sinaiticus and that's spelled s I n a t a i c u s s I n a t a i c u s and it's given the letter Excuse me.

Aleph in the Greek alphabet. And it dates back to about 340 AD. Now some people date it slightly older than the Vaticanus. But I would say most scholars probably date it slightly younger than the Vaticanus about 340 AD.

What's interesting? This was used a lot by Westcott and Hort when they found a portion of scriptures missing from the Vaticanus. They would then go to the Sinaiticus to try to find it if they found it there that would hold the authority over the received Text but what's amazing?

So they kind of go back to these two texts and they hated the received text and they loved the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus. But what's interesting about it? Is that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus do not even agree with each other.

They vary from each other in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of places for example in John 3 13. In John 9 35 in Romans 14 10 and 1st Timothy 3 16 the Sinaiticus agrees with the Vaticanus against the deity of Christ.

Let me give you an example. Let's see brother. Which one did I give? Yeah, brother bill read First Timothy 3 16 in that version and the rest of you turn in your Bible to first Timothy 3 16. Now in this particular verse the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus both agree With the version that brother bill is about to read and brother Clarence could also read it from.

The revised standard version bill has a new American standard. Any of you who may have brought a new American standard. You'll see that it agrees with with bills, but it disagrees with the King James.

Who Deborah would you read the King James for me? Okay, stop right there. Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifest in the flesh. What would that teach? What doctrine would that teach?

It teaches Jesus is God. Jesus is God manifest in the flesh. That's the deity of Christ. If you were an Aryan, would you like that verse to be in your Bible? It'd be a problem, wouldn't it? All right bill read yours.

Stop. It didn't have the word God in it. It said he who was revealed in the flesh that could be anybody. It's he rather than God. So it could be Jesus and so it could be teaching that Jesus has come in the flesh.

Which we all know that doesn't prove whether he's a man an angel or God. It just proves he came in the flesh, but the received text says God was manifest in the flesh. It's perhaps the strongest verse in the Bible and the deity of Christ all the modern versions have changed the word God to the word He now that can seem like a small insignificant change and you might say well, he still means God.

Well, it does to you because you're not an Aryan. But if you were an Aryan and I've argued with them and they've shown me this verse in their New World Translation. They said doesn't say God there. It says he.

I said, well funny my Bible says God and I said, yeah, but your Bible is wrong. So you think it doesn't make a difference argue with one of them and let them take away your best verse and see how you Like it because I've been there and done that.

I used to sit on porches for hours. Arguing with these people before I learned it didn't do much good. All right. So the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus, would you read that? Did you look it up Clarence?

It's hard to see isn't it? Yes, it's small print so it's he and both it'll fact that'll hold true on all the modern versions. Now what's interesting is the Sinaiticus agrees with the Vaticanus on that and they both say he rather than God.

But all of the thousands and thousands of received text documents that we have all say God in them. But what's even funnier than that if you go into Colossians? Chapter 2 verses 9 through 10 and Mark chapter 1 in verse 1 the Sinaiticus Keeps the deity of Christ in those verses, but the Vaticanus takes it out now.

I really did not check in your two versions on this one. They may keep it in because it depends on whether Westcott and Hort took it. I don't know whether they favored. Why don't you read one of those bill?

Why don't you read Colossians? 2 9 and 10 and let's see if they went with the Vaticanus or the Sinaiticus. Uh-huh. Well that pretty much I think that pretty well stays there what. What about look up mark 1 1.

See sometimes Westcott and Hort would go with the Sinaiticus over the Vaticanus, but not often. Mark apparently there they did mark 1 1. Okay, they kept that they kept they got that from the Sinaiticus.

What's interesting is the Vaticanus removes the word God there in mark 1 1 and it removes the deity of Christ from Colossians? 2 9 through 10, but the Sinaiticus keeps it. So there's an example of where the two of them disagree.

Now what's interesting is they would use two? Manuscripts and say they were the best and most accurate because they're the oldest but the two of them don't agree with each other. So one of them's wrong or both of them are wrong on these particular types of verses and that's just one demonstration Of the lack of agreement between the ones that these modern scholars try to use and they try to say they're better than the received text, but They disagree not only with the received text but with each other.

Now we'll get back into some more of that in a minute. So keep keep your Bibles there gentlemen. We'll look at them here a few minutes, but let me give you the next unseal. This is the third one. We'll mention it's from the 5th century.

It's called the Alexandrinus. Some people call it Alexandria's some call it the Alexandrinus and that's given the letter a capital letter a it leans strongly towards the Byzantine or the received text, but it has some verses that are more like the The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus so it's kind of a mixed text and remember that phrase because we'll get back on our conclusion.

We'll get back to that. All right. There's also a C a D and L and a Delta those are the most ancient of the unseals now the next type of Group that we come into which would be Roman numeral number two and our study here are called the Greek cursives.

Cursives mean just what it says they are written in cursive and small letters usually and some people call them the minuscules and We have about 2429 of them so we have a lot more of those and we have unseals.

But they date we don't have any that date back as old as the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. They date back generally to the 9th through the 16th century. It's interesting that out of the cursives they agree three to one with the received text.

There are three times as many of them that agree with their seed received text as there are that agree with the Westcott or text. Now the third Roman numeral and in type of material that we have to look at are called lectionaries.

These are very important. So I don't want you to forget this word. We'll come back to it in our final study the lectionaries. They contain extracts from the New Testament. There are about a thousand six hundred and seventy eight of those that we have that have been found.

And what they were they were like, you know. Have you ever been in some other church now Baptist churches don't do this, but if you've ever been to an Episcopalian Church service. Where they have responsive reading how many have ever been to one?

All right. You know how they have books and in the back of the pews you can pick the book out and they'll tell you where look. And you'll read have responsive reading that's been done for thousands of years.