KJV Onlyism Revisited:Separating Fact from Fiction Part 2 - Text Type History

and welcome to the program today my name is james whiten we are continuing with uh... our examination of the king james only controversy specifically looking at the king james only presentation in powerpoint the number of you have uh...

can even count how many requests i got this week uh... for this particular uh...

item in fact looking here in my uh... thing i i think about twenty five or thirty at least and i'd say at least half of those bounced back to me uh...

because there are many many people who uh... while they would like to have the uh... this particular presentation uh...

are not on a real internet service provider that actually allows them to download anything more than about one megabyte in size so i had uh...

and i'd say about half of the requests that were sent to me uh... bounced back and your i s p said no no no no too big i can't accept that and uh...

just uh... shipped it back to me so if you have requested it from me and didn't get it that's why you didn't get it uh...

even did have someone who uh... uh... instead of putting eighty sixteen eleven uh...

uh... i don't know why we only do it by email actually um... and a separate eighty sixteen eleven they put k j v sixteen eleven but i was merciful and said that anyways so uh...

anyhow uh... but maybe thinking about making it available another way or whatever uh...

alia uh... that that doesn't matter more maybe we'll be able to put up on the website will be able to have to be it or whatever i don't know but uh...

those you who have it's and uh... hopefully those you who are listening right now uh...

i've been told by the powers that be that we can upload uh... the program um... the powerpoint presentation to the web you can f t p at h t t p at however you want to get it and uh...

maybe next week we can let you know or you just look at the website and see if you can find a simple i don't know maybe give you exact u r l next week because it made those you who have the presentation uh...

we were on slide sixteen last week and we were discussing the issue of the majority text in the fact that during the first millennium the majority text if you simply counted noses would have been the alexandrian style of manuscript and let me just mention uh...

in passing there are many who have been exposed to king james only literature that when they hear the word alexandrian automatically begin to think of some devilish and uh...

deceitful thing uh... the problem is uh... that that's just simply silly uh...

the alexandrian manuscripts are simply manuscripts of the new testament uh... to attempt to attach them to some sort of uh...

heretical viewpoint is uh... is simply without merit in fact i would uh... invite anyone to listen uh...

to the programs that we did with uh... doctor d a weight right challenge him on that very issue he uh...

brought up the issue of gnosticism and he uh... tried to say at the alexandrian manuscripts that contained heresy in their produced by heretics i challenged him over and over and over again prove this a demonstrate the show this to us and he was unable to do so uh...

they're unable to do so because there is no evidence of this is a will alexander is filled with heretics well uh...

every city has had its share of heretics uh... air arianism for example the now the dvd of christ was very very popular uh...

in the byzantine area and in uh... the eastern part of the roman empire and uh... so does does that mean the byzantine manuscripts are suspect in that in that way uh...

again that that the key thing that i think anyone will see and we'll see this throughout the presentation is that if you simply utilize consistency in your thinking and in your argumentation the king james only position simply cannot stand it is simply not possible for to stand because it is absolutely dependent upon the use of completely different standards for the king james and it's text type than for anybody else and if you simply think logically if you sent simply uh...

argue consistently you will not be able to defend the king james only position and uh...

in looking at slide number sixteen we're pointing out that the alexandrian manuscripts and of course our modern texts are are more alexandrian in flavor than they are byzantine in flavor they're not fully alexandrian because no manuscript tradition is absolutely perfect in that sense uh...

any of the manuscript traditions uh... have their textual variations within them that we can determine and can uh...

demonstrate were not original uh... but uh... the alexandrian manuscripts do represent a more primitive form the text in the byzantine generally does the byzantine manuscript tradition generally represents a secondary form the text we can see this because of conflations and other uh...

means by which we can tell the person who was copying that manuscript had more than one kind of manuscript in front of him had more than one reading in front of him conflated those together or made other uh...

type of uh... most normally unintentional changes based upon uh...

having more than one kind of type of text available to him but uh... the point we're making last week is the alexandrian manuscripts were the majority during the first millennium and i was addressing majority text advocates i defined the majority text position is the viewpoint that you in essence count uh...

manuscripts and if they're if a particular reading is in a majority of manuscripts even if it's you know fifty five percent forty five percent you go with the fifty five percent you just simply count noses is how you take care of the particular situation and i was pointing out the one of the reasons i am not a majority text advocate is that of the result of this is uh...

that the text changes over time that is what was the majority text in uh...

the year one thousand uh... would not be the majority text in the year fifteen hundred of the majority text near two thousand uh...

that's i think one of the biggest problems with that the other major problem with it is i think it goes history uh...

that is uh... there is a reason why a particular family of manuscripts the byzantine manuscripts predominate when you include all manuscripts written up through say the year fifteen hundred and the reason for that uh...

is uh... interestingly enough has become more important just over the past number of months while the primary reasons the byzantine manuscripts predominates because because it was only in the area around byzantium the greek continued to be uh...

a spoken language and said that manuscripts continue to be produced uh... in a heavy number uh...

in those particular is because of something called the rise of islam when islam swept across north africa up into spain and france and then eventually moving toward constantinople uh...

during the middle ages and up until the fourteen fifties when constantinople finally fell uh... that's uh...

obviously impacts manuscript production in those areas and so uh...

you have latin being the primary language in europe uh... the places where alexandria manuscripts were produced are no longer even christian they were under muslim control and the area around byzantium is still speaking in writing greek uh...

if that doesn't make an obvious impact upon the number of manuscripts are gonna be produced i don't know what will uh...

that again i think deeply impacts the issue of what is the majority text over time and so uh...

those are some of the reasons i have a problem with the majority text uh... perspective now keeping that in mind going to the next uh...

screen number seventeen we have another chart here and uh... in this chart uh...

in the middle there's a little key and it shows you that uh... the white uh...

elements of the graph are what are called papyri the green elements are called unseals and the black art minuscules that's a little bit misleading only in the sense that uh...

papyri refer to a kind of writing material while unseals and minuscules refer to a writing style but these are terms that are used by textual critics and historians to describe kinds of manuscripts the papyri manuscripts are the most ancient and they of course are written upon papyri uh...

which is a writing material uh... made from pressing leaves crosswise from one another uh...

generally this would result in one smooth side and one rough side uh... interestingly enough christians generally use both sides of a piece of papyri even the rough side which led to some problems at times uh...

because christians wrote their manuscripts in a codex form that is a book form uh... with writing on both sides and uh...

did not write their new testament writings uh... on uh... in a scroll type format at all uh...

which is uh... an interesting uh... artifact of history shall we say uh...

papyri manuscripts because they are on a less durable form of material are by nature uh...

less likely to survive time than say unseal manuscripts which were generally written upon vellum and uh...

vellum of course a form of leather is much more uh... likely to stand the test of time uh...

but it's also much more expensive and uh... that is why during the early periods especially during the periods of church persecution uh...

is not surprising to find a new testimony scripts written upon papyri uh... whereas after the piece the church in three thirteen uh...

you have an explosion in number of unseals on vellum that are available now an unseal also is a kind of writing and uh...

if you'll go to slide number eighteen you'll notice eighteen uh... seventeen nineteen the same slide so if you just go to eighteen uh...

you can see uh... what an unseal type of text looks like unseal refers to a kind of writing and on slide number eighteen you see uh...

and unseal example these are capitalized greek letters and uh...

they are written in a single line with no punctuation and no space between the letters and so what you have in the greek there is actually uh...

romans chapter five verse one and uh... those of you who read greek can see the similar uh...

passage down below in the standard minuscule text that is uh... available to us today and uh...

obviously since there was no uh... type of uh...

editing in the sense of uh... marks there were a few that were sometimes used but generally the unseal text had no type of punctuation uh...

no space between the letters uh... words would cut between lines uh... hence for example uh...

if your your uh... vellum manuscript uh... lost say the side of a page uh...

there are some manuscripts ancient manuscripts where sometimes it'll have a variant in it'll it'll it'll have the text we'd look at in it sometimes it will not sometimes it only have half of it the reason being a part of the page has has come off over over the years uh...

over the many centuries and um... half a word might be there have word may be gone it it it all depends uh...

for example if you look at the first line those of you who can uh... uh...

read greek will see uh... that's the word the the first line in unseal text ends with all but the last letter of the word i really it's actually i really need peace the uh...

accusative form of iranian uh... but it continues on the next line and uh...

you can imagine if you're familiar with uh... the greek uh... language uh... that there are times when that can be somewhat of a uh...

uh... confusing thing especially if you're reading someone else's handwriting if you're reading someone else's handwriting that can uh...

uh... increase uh... the probability or possibility of a person misunderstanding uh...

the text that they are copying uh... if they're copying by sight now please realize that uh...

after the piece the church in the establishment of a formalized external uh... christianity uh...

you have the situations where manuscripts would be produced in script or eons where an individual is sitting up front and is in essence dictating the text to those who are listening to the scribes who are listening in a write down what he's saying now that introduces a whole new uh...

realm of possibilities did you miss here what someone said uh... does the person pronounced certain words in a in a way that might be confusing so on and so forth uh...

there were checks and balances that were in place where there are corrections that were made in fact many of the corrections that we see in manuscripts today work we're done in the first hand a person who would copy it they went back and checked his work said hopes made a mistake uh...

and uh... and corrected immediately others types of corrections were made sometimes days weeks months or years or decades later depending on the situation how was uh...

how was produced uh... we can see from the unsealed text of that it is a uh...

uh... much less easy to read form of the text and what we have down the bottom of this particular screen which is what you have in the standard minuscule text on a minuscule if you go back to uh...

slide number seventeen uh... you'll see that the top the uh... the black boxes minuscules and you'll also see it those by far predominate as far as starting in the uh...

ninth century then you have uh... them exploding becoming the by far the uh...

well the only form of text whatsoever after the tenth century uh... and uh... going back to eighteen this is your uh...

type of mixed type that has spaces between words it can have punctuation uh...

and it can be a mixture of capitals and small letters now obviously when this type of writing developed the breaking up of words had to be it was an editorial process and some of very few but some of the variations some of the disputed passages uh...

in the testament go back to well have we divided this word up properly uh...

is this what was originally intended because if there's punctuation in a text it was not original uh...

the same thing is true by the way of the hebrew old testament uh... it is amazing how many folks assume that the hebrew old testament had the exact same form as we have it today uh...

at the time for example of christ when that is not the case the hebrew masoretic text uh... took the form that has today around the same time is the development of minuscule text in greek and that is around the time the masoretes in the eighth ninth and century is running there and the val pointing in the hebrew old testament was added at that time i remember having a bit of a dialogue with a uh...

an individual who is an anti trinitarian he was from the atlanta bible college i believe is what is called and he was an anti trinitarian his entire argument against the dvd of christ at least in what he the sent to me and what we discussed was based upon the val pointing of the uh...

uh... word adonai as add a knee at some one ten one and he said see they only val pointed uh...

adonai as add a knee when they knew that it was a human being so g is only human being because this is about jesus and i'm like world dot in nine centuries after christ the jews val pointed this a passage is quoted frequently in the new testament in such ways indicate that they believed that this adonai was a human like dot again how of course they would was that have to do with anything that was not what existed at the time of christ and he was just shocked uh...

that i would not believe that the uh... the val pointing uh... added uh... that's exactly that's exactly right senate uh...

fellow in the chat show me exactly what i was referring to uh... very impressed uh... this particular uh...

individual i was just uh... amazed that i would well in fact he uh... he uh... argued that i was rejecting the uh...

uh... inspiration scripture for saying that the val pointing cannot be made determinative in the text the old testament and uh...

obviously i was not in any way shape or form so if we go back to number and nineteen that is uh...

uh... uh... that is a graph that shows us the relative number of texts and you'll notice looking at slide number uh...

nineteen uh... that if you put the tenth through the sixteen centuries together in essence uh...

you have the vast bulk of all the manuscripts of the new testament and of course remember a minister of the testament is not necessarily uh...

contain um... the entirety of the new testament there are there are manuscripts of uh...

matthew their manuscripts of mark of their manuscripts of the gospels manuscripts of you know things like that uh...

and uh... obviously as you get farther into history more of the manuscripts that are contained there would contain of the entirety of the new testament uh...

whereas the earlier go the more they're likely to be fragments are to contain a section of the new testament but the miniscules uh...

contain the uh... the vast majority uh... of the number of manuscripts and so by simple numeration uh...

whatever is contained in those manuscripts from the tenth of the sixteenth century is going to be adding all of them up the quote -unquote majority text but again as we've already noticed uh...

that means that we are automatically stuck believing that the the text that is the farthest removed from the original by time is most reflective of the most ancient text and i just do not see how that uh...

can possibly uh... be a a position of the person wants uh... wants to adopt uh...

but that is uh... what is said uh... by many today now if we go to a number uh...

twenty slide and number twenty the uh... textus receptus was created by the work of a roman catholic priest and a scholar the prince of the humanists desiderius arrasmus now arrasmus is a fascinating fellow uh...

i've done uh... a lot of reading in arrasmus a lot of study of arrasmus is life uh...

and despite what the people might think in reality i have a tremendous amount of respect for arrasmus i have a tremendous tremendous amount of respect for uh...

the uh... the fact that he was willing to criticize the established church of his day uh...

he was willing to uh... put himself in in danger in essence by uh...

publishing material that just simply wasn't popular in its time he was a firmly against the relic trade uh...

he spoke much of the centrality of christ and yet he was an artifact of his day uh...

that is he also wrote in defense of transubstantiation in the mass and uh...

he was a roman catholic he was a roman catholic priest and he never left uh...

communion with rome in fact he was uh... the first person to debate one of the reformers as you well know the first written debate of the formal reformation was between dexterous arrasmus and martin luther on the nature of the will specifically arrasmus defending the freedom of the will over against martin luther defending the bondage of the will and so this is the same arrasmus uh...

who in uh... fifteen sixteen printed and published the first edition of the greek new testament now let me mention in passing this was not the first printed addition the new testament but it was the first printed and published addition of the greek new testament now what's the difference uh...

cardinal jimenez had already produced what history tells us was in fact a superior addition of the greek new testament and it had already been printed it was sitting in a warehouse and you might say well why was it wasn't available well you gotta remember we're talking about fifteen sixteen here we're talking about a period of time where rome reigns supreme and uh...

right before the reformation and you simply did not publish a book without getting papal approval and you can imagine that getting papal approval uh...

takes a whole lot of time there was a tremendous amount of bureaucratic red tape and uh...

so uh... in that uh... particular situation uh...

arrasmus was sort of up against uh... a little bit of a uh... he got a little tricky let's just put it that way he got a little tricky and uh...

what he did uh... is he was under pressure from john of froben who was his printer the froben knew about him and as he knew that uh...

him and as was ready to go and froben was very very concerned that if they didn't get their new testament out immediately that it was going to be uh...

swept away as irrelevant uh... by him and as is uh... very nicely printed in and uh...

a prepared addition and so he was putting a lot of pressure on arrasmus so arrasmus took a chance he went ahead and not only printed but published and he he he rushed i mean he himself described that first edition as precipitated rather than edited precipitated rather than edited and that resulted in a number of errors some of which arrasmus corrected over the next four editions he put out five editions uh...

during his lifetime uh... some were not but he rushed to press with it and went ahead and published it without papal approval so what was his uh...

what was his ploy what was his trickery he dedicated the first edition of his greek new testament to pope leo the tenth the pope who otherwise would have to have approved the publication in the first place so he dedicated the first edition and the irony of course uh...

is that this then becomes uh... the basis of the textus receptus which becomes the basis of the king james version of the new testament uh...

and it is just almost hilarious at times especially given what i do but it's hilarious uh...

to encounter king james only advocates advocates that come into our chat room uh... i talked to him on AOL once in a while they send email all the time and uh...

they're accusing me of being a secret jesuit uh... working for the church uh... the roman catholic church to uh...

destroy uh... the true bible the king the sixteen eleven king james version of the bible if any of them were actually using the sixteen eleven we'll get into that later but and it's just uh...

i have to laugh because the fact that the the text that they then defend was produced by roman catholic priest and dedicated to pope leo the tenth who by the way is the one who excommunicated martin luther uh...

it's it's just the history has a way of of coming back and and uh... and making you uh...

uh... sort of laugh just a little bit at uh... at what is uh... what is being said but it as it may uh...

rasmus printed and published the first edition of his greek news has which he called the novel instrumental many did that because it was actually a dialogue uh...

on one side of the page you have the greek text he produced on the other side a a new latin translation that he himself had produced uh...

and this was first published in fifteen sixteen now the third edition of his text was particularly influential and it had a very wide distribution a total of five additions came from him and after him stefanus in fifteen fifty five produced a very important addition and then theodore bazaar who was john calvin's successor at geneva uh...

which also causes a few king james only folks who tend in general to be anti -calvinistic uh...

a little bit of a problem but uh... calvin's successor at uh... geneva theodore bazaar produced an especially important version fifteen ninety eight uh...

and it was used by the king james version translators for their new testament work that work was done between sixteen oh four and sixteen eleven if we go to slide number twenty one we will see that the modern texts such as the new american standard bible uh...

the uh... uh... new national version modern translations are based upon a greek text that is a different from the texas receptus it is an eclectic text uh...

that is it draws from a wider variety of sources than the t r does including manuscripts unknown in the days of rasmus in fact uh...

rasmus had no access uh... to the papyri manuscripts that we have today most of which were not found in his day at all uh...

he did not have access to for example codex sinaiticus which had not been found codex vaticanus was known in his day and one of the things the king james only advocates need to remember uh...

is that the uh... originator of the texas receptus wanted to use codex vaticanus uh...

in fact uh... when a controversy erupted after his initial publication due to the fact that uh...

none of the manuscripts that rasmus had and he only had between six and twelve about half a dozen to a dozen manuscripts none of the manuscripts that were available to rasmus had the famous passage called the comma you'll harm you know first on five seven and so people came down on rasmus like a ton of bricks and he was defending his reading which is found the first and second editions of rasmus is work and he wrote to a friend of his name bombast yes now i would hate to have the name bombast yes but there is a felony bombast yes in rome and he specifically asked bombast yes to go and to look at the vatican manuscript that is codex vaticanus and to find out if it contained first john five seven is found the king james version the bible and uh...

bombast yes did and he wrote back and said no it does not have its and rasmus utilize that in his defense of uh...

his reading the first the second editions now he did eventually give into the pressure and uh...

he had to he had said that he did not believe there is a single manuscript that contained it well a manuscript in all probability was written which contained the passage in greek and provided to rasmus and so he inserted it with a lengthy note explaining why he felt that it was not should not be there uh...

in the third edition of his uh... new testament and that was the one that had the widest distribution and uh...

to be honest with you that's why it's in the king james version the bible first on five seven is not original uh...

it is not a part of the original greek text and those who argue that it should be inserted i need to recognize that in reality by so arguing they are saying uh...

that's we basically cannot trust the tax the new testament greek at all uh...

it is it truly undercuts the very basis of the uh... confidence we have in the text the new testament but will continue on with our discussion and uh...

start taking your calls in about twenty minutes uh... here on the dividing line at eight six six eight five four sixty seven sixty three eight six six eight five four six seven six three your questions maybe your responses to what we've covered so far we'll be covered next twenty minutes right here on the dividing line and welcome back to the dividing line my name is james white and we are talking about the uh...

subject of the king james only controversy and uh... we're looking at a powerpoint presentation which i uh...

just copied over to another part of the network by the way uh... doing little network stuff here a little geeky stuff of course webcasting is pretty geeky as it is but anyways we're at talking about a little bit of ancient history to our at it looking at the background of uh...

where the various texts came from all in an effort to get around to uh... answering uh...

the uh... the question of why there are variations in the modern translations and uh...

we're looking at slide number twenty one for those of you who have been uh... following along on the powerpoint presentation and uh...

we're talking about the modern texts uh... the modern texts are based on an eclectic text uh...

we utilize the papyri in the production of for example the uh... most current of the text and that is uh...

the nestle all and twenty seventh edition and a twenty seven some of you in the chat room now know why that's significant the nestle all in twenty seventh edition some of those papyri utilized in the production uh...

of the nestle all in text uh... date to as early as eighty one twenty five and uh...

but these different sources being more primitive do not show the effect of long -term transcription uh...

seen in the byzantine text and hence are not as full as the t r now of course that very use the term full uh...

causes people to go what what what do you mean and what i'm referring to there is simply the fact that uh...

the byzantine text um...

because the fact that it represents a later ecclesiastical text uh...

tends to be a fuller text and we saw this earlier on in fact if we go back uh...

he's find the exact uh... slide here uh... to go back to slide number six uh...

what in essence you're seeing in slide number six under modern versions is the primitive form of the text and under the king james version you have the post eighty one thousand ecclesiastical byzantine texas receptus type reading what i mean by fuller is seen in what you have in those two columns there is a tendency on the part of scribes who tended to be monks uh...

people involved in monastic type life to expand titles of deity via piety pietistic expansion it's always struck me as a little strange if we continue looking at number six for example in the gospels in the king james version of the bible there are places where jesus is simply referred to as he and he replied and said so it's obviously not irreligious or blasphemous to use the singular masculine pronoun he in reference to jesus without calling him jesus or jesus christ or the lord jesus christ et cetera et cetera if the holy spirit of god inspired the writers of the new testament to at times use a singular pronoun of jesus then there's nothing wrong in doing that and yet many people will look at a chart like it was as found on on slide number six and say well you know what's under the king james column just sounds better doesn't sound more respectful does that mean that the modern versions of second john three that have jesus christ are more respectful than the king james and matthew fourteen only has jesus i mean again we need to think logically here if it's always better to have the longest title shouldn't jesus always be called the lord jesus christ throughout every reference in the bible wouldn't that be the best thing to do if in point of fact that argument actually holds any water it's interesting when you look at the gospels in the gospels themselves even in the king james version i'm i'm recalling this from memory right now i'd have to check this but i do not believe the phrase lord jesus christ appears in the gospels even in the king james version of the bible that is a title that developed over time and is reflected in the later new testament writings here again is another one these many examples of where we need to be consistent in the application of our reasoning and so when i talk about a a fuller text on slide number twenty one this is what i'm talking about these earlier sources is more primitive sources do not reflect the expansion of piety that we see uh...

taking place in the texas receptus looking at number twenty three i'm sorry twenty two and here's where people really come down on me like a ton of bricks i've been called every name under the sun for emphasizing this particular point when we speak of textual differences between the t r and modern texts we need to immediately emphasize something that is often lost in the debate there is no doctrine of the christian faith that is based upon any single text and no doctrine of the faith is changed or altered by any variation of the text if one applies the same rules of exegesis to the t r and the nasty on twenty seventh edition the results will be the same the variations to not change the message last year uh...

we did a series during the summer in response to d a weight in theater elitist and uh...

that was one of the things they they both went after and we refuted them fully at that time and as i mentioned then we invited them to be on they refused to do so uh...

these folks are not interested in in actual debate they just want to uh... uh... you know preach on the issue and uh...

debate would be very very detrimental to their side but is this assertion that just makes people uh...

c red what i'm saying is if you take the most byzantine manuscript there is and you take the most alexandrian manuscript there is and you apply the same rules of exegesis that is you start with the assumption of the consistency an inspiration of the text you use the same rules of grammatical interpretation you pay attention to the syntax et cetera et cetera you will not come up with a different gospel with a different christ with a different message in any way shape or form in fact scholars who work with the uh...

other kinds of ancient texts have to chuckle a bit at not only the wealth of information that we who work in the new testament area have but likewise the range of variation is so much smaller in the new testament text is so pure in comparison to anything else we're talking about a very small percentage of text where there is any serious question concerning which of the variant uh...

which of two variants or three variants is the actual original reading uh...

so if you take the most byzantine text there is and the most alexandrian text there is that have the maximum number of differences between them you're still reading the exact same book and you do not come up with a different message and uh...

that could be proven uh... has been proven every time anyone has debated uh...

but like i said most of them don't want to try to debate if you look at slide number twenty three you get a uh...

a little graphic here of sort of jim where the major translations come from as to their sources we have the king james version of sixteen eleven the new king james from and uh...

nineteen eighty four the nsb from nineteen sixty and the niv from nineteen seventy eight and you will see it for example the king james comes from the byzantine tradition the texas receptus comes from that tradition with by the way some very important additions from the latin vulgate uh...

some of the key uh... passages of controversy i guess we should say some of the key passages of controversy uh...

that are in the t r actually came from latin vulgate irasmus inserted texts into the t r from the latin vulgate and interestingly enough some very strange readings in the king james version old testament came by the king james translators utilizing the vulgate over the hebrew i listed these in my book the king james only controversy will go into a right now but uh...

some of the readings are very very unusual and very strange and uh... these go into the t r and in the t r is the basis of both the king james in the king james now there's a real confusion this point uh...

i've i've met lots and lots of folks uh... who that the new king james was based upon the majority text uh...

even though uh... people like farce dad and others that were part of the jury text movement uh...

were very big in the production of the new king james version the new king james version new testament is based upon the texas receptus it's old testament is the fifteen twenty five blomberg just like the uh...

king james version how ever the new king james did uh...

stick with the hebrew better than the king james did so the result is there are variations between the king james a new king james where the king james in essence left the hebrew and i think there's some places also with a new king james goes the septuagint reading but then again the king james version translator themselves uh...

likewise uh... spoke of the value and usefulness of the greek septuagint in the translation of the old testament too but in the new testament which is where most of the the the variations are are found in and debated and argued about the king james version of the new king james version both use the same text i suppose at this point should be pointed out the textus receptus is not really honestly a single text in fact on the john ankerberg show that was recorded back in nineteen ninety five as i recall of the uh...

same ones uh... and uh... so be that as it may that's he are that most people have today i was talking to a uh...

a good uh... good uh... internet friend of mine uh... which uh... i'll just call him by his current nick that he uses in channel messio uh...

used to be t g e uh... goes to a school that will remain nameless uh...

known for being reformed anyways which is a good thing but for some reason they're into this uh... ecclesiastical tech stuff and uh...

they utilize the texas receptus which is most popular today and if you see anyone running around i'm holding in my hand right now it is a but deep blue covered dark blue cover uh...

it says hey kind idea fake a on the front in capital greek letters and uh...

down on uh... the publishing on the spine it says tbs for trinitarian bible society the trinitarian bible society uh...

addition of the texas receptus is what is used in almost every school i've encountered uh...

that is either king james only or king james preference or met or something along those lines uh...

ecclesiastical text whatever uh... this is the one that's used and yet very few of the people with whom i have spoken who were using that realized what they're actually holding in their hand if you have one of these little blue t r s this thing did not exist until sixteen eleven at the earliest in reality this is a a text that came along after that but as far as the the readings put all together in one place that are found in this edition of t r this did not exist until sixteen eleven no manuscript of the greek new testament that has ever been found anywhere reads exactly like this book because the t r that people run around with today and say this is the received text yada yada yada the t r the people run around with today in reality is based on the greek newt the biggest is based on the king james version of the bible scrivener came along he looked at the decisions the textual decisions that were made by the king james translators he took the various editions of a rasmus and stefanos and beza he was able to determine by the translation of the english text which readings the king james translators the various committees that many different places had chosen and remember there was no there is really no consistency between the various king james uh...

committees that met at different schools so in other words one committee might prefer stefanosis version one committee might prefer the third issue rasmus one committee might prefer beza uh...

so there's no consistency on that level either you've got these these uh...

should decisions made by the king james translators they then translate that waste scrivener goes back he looks decisions they made looks at the text they had determines what text they took to be the original and creates what's known today as the t r on the basis of the textual decisions of the king james translators so this is actually a greek text whose readings are based upon the king james translation of the bible in sixteen from sixteen eleven and none of the printed uh...

additions whether it's a rasmus to finance or beza prior the king james version of the bible had the exact readings of this edition has i would i would like to think that everyone who's running around with this thing and are holding it up as being the beyond and all of all things knows all that but that has not then my experience uh...

that has not been my experience they date they don't know that they just honestly uh... thought that uh...

but this is how has been around this is what that the church had chosen and and uh... so on so forth and that just simply isn't the case that's not the case let's uh...

proceed on a number twenty four here we've got one caller online at eight six six eight five four sixty seven sixty three eight six six eight five four sixty seven sixty three that room for another if you all would like to uh...

get online with your questions uh... we're gonna have one question about all of them being as codex sinaiticus and codex vaticanus uh...

often vilified uh... by the uh... uh... king james only advocates uh...

but uh... we will see hopefully that uh... with uh... no reason when we get a chance look at those but number twenty four number twenty four says what does all this have to do with first in the three sixteen you may recall that's what we were talking about first timothy three sixteen and to explain the difference between those two passages aware we have if you recall back what the variation of initially was and if you need to find that that is uh...

found on slide number five the king james version says about controversy greatest mystery of godliness god was manifest in the flesh over against new americans their bible by common confession greatest mystery godness who is manifest uh...

uh... in the flash that is the variation and if you forgot what it looked like go back to number twenty four and you will see the uh...

text of the two versions of the two texts as they would appear in unseal tax which is what was found the papyri and in the unseals in the first centuries and if you compare the two of them uh...

if you don't have good eyes you won't see the differences once you find the difference you can go to the next slide number twenty five and you will see where the difference is between the two and if you want to see that blown up a little bit then you go to number twenty six and number twenty six gives you the actual variation between the two readings god was manifest in the flesh and he was manifest in the flesh and there you come to discover that in reality the difference is extremely small god is chaos he who is hoss but and this is the piece of information that is often missing they also is called a no man a sacred no man a sacred these were special words that were abbreviated in the unseal text of the new testament a line to be placed over top of them as an indication that they are one of the no man a sacred and when you compare the abbreviation of god which is theta sigma with the word for hoss which is omicron sigma you would see that the difference between the two is extremely small a theta has a line across the middle an omicron does not but please think about something a papyri manuscript is made of what a papyri manuscript is made of leaves in essence and a papyri manuscript is going to have lines in the writing material vellum manuscripts vellum manuscripts were written on leather what does leather have well leather has lines as well so put yourself in the situation of an individual who is copying a manuscript say around the time of of the council of nicaea or something along that time period and that individual is reading someone else's handwriting someone else's handwriting who is written on leather you come just go back for just a moment to slide number 24 you're copying along and you come to a round letter and a sigma now is that line in the middle from the leather is that line up above from the leather or was it intentional the person who originally copied it may not even be accessible to you any longer they may not even be alive anymore you can't go to them and ask them what did you write here and so you as the scribe have to make the choice is that theta sigma or omicron sigma there is only one line difference between the two the line in the theta and the line over the nomina sacra if that was included now a lot of folks don't like this because that's a real simple call in other words there's no big conspiracy here there's no big you can see how the variation developed and once you have the facts before you that just doesn't preach very good you're not going to sell a bunch of books and your new gail ripplinger videotapes when people know what the facts are about what the actual variation is but of course most folks don't know the facts about what the variation is and so it just looks to them like the king james calls jesus god and the modern translations don't and that must mean the modern translators are godless men who don't like jesus and therefore they're heretics and so let's go burn our niv's should christians really think like that should christians be that irrational or should christians be people who know their faith and know it well enough to be able to get to this level in defending their text and defending the text of scripture i really think that christians should be able to find out about things like that and uh i think i can defend that as being a proper position to take as well 866 -854 -6763 866 -854 -6763 and we're going to take a brief break we'll be back with your calls right here on the dividing line and welcome back to dividing line my name is james white we're talking about the king james only controversy and textual criticism and all sorts of neat fun stuff 866 -854 -6763 is the phone number to be involved today and that's the number that rec from minneapolis minnesota called hi rec that's my hometown well actually robinsdale is my hometown do you know where north memorial is?

i actually live in brooklyn center oh do you know where north memorial is? the hospital? yep yep that's where i was born yeah and i bet you it's considerably cooler up there than it is where i am yeah but it's raining so it's not white yet give it some time i imagine y 'all will have plenty of white stuff in time for christmas what do you think?

yep it was very cool when i was born december 17th in minneapolis but anyways that's not why you called no actually i'm in the midst i borrowed your book the king james only controversy from a friend of mine i'm not a king james only advocate by any way shape or form and i liked a lot of the things that i read in your book that i wasn't aware about the received text but my memory isn't really great but i read the revision revised about 5 years ago and the one thing that i'm really confused about is bergen would always talk about olive and bee as being hopelessly corrupt and in your book you just refer to them as the great codexes and uh...

say things like he'd take so many verses and he'd he would compare them to the received text and i think that's where a lot of the king james only people have a big mistake when they look at bergen because they just see that he compared it to the received text and they just stop right there see it's different from the received text but then he'd point out when you look at all the places that the two of them are different from the received text they disagree with each other more often than they agree with each other and so i'm confused right well there's a number of things first of all i think dean bergen today would not take the position that he did then bergen lived about 20 or 30 years before the discovery of the papyri and i think if he had lived with knowledge of their existence given his own statements about textual criticism for example he rejected the kama johannium at first john five seven given his own statements he would have had to have changed his own perspective in light of the existence of the papyri but he didn't and we also need to recognize bergen was responding to an unbalanced position that is he was responding to westcott and hort and westcott and hort's position is not the modern position it is very very common for king james only materials to assume that the modern text is basically a slavish reproduction of westcott and hort when it isn't they basically reproduced sinaiticus with a little reliance upon vaticanus as if it was the be all and end all of all things and we've moved away from that we've recognized that that is not the direction you go either and so there's more balance in the use of the materials that are available to us today than there is represented by westcott and hort but the question is what does he mean by hopelessly corrupt well a couple things to remember about especially sinaiticus first of all there's a bunch and i think it's good to take a moment to explain this there are a bunch of really bad stories that circle around out there for example d .a.

weight likes to say it was found in a trash can and people hear that story and they just recirculate it as if it was actually true what actually happened was count von tischendorf was searching for ancient biblical manuscripts in palestine and in the area in the middle east and he was visiting saint catherine's monastery at the foot of what is called mount sinai it probably actually isn't mount sinai but the traditional location anyway is mount sinai and one day while he was visiting there he saw a monk carrying a trash can to the kitchen to put some stuff into the stove for fuel and he looked inside the trash can he saw scraps of ancient manuscripts and he sort of freaked out which of course freaked out the monks and he told you you shouldn't be burning this stuff this is very valuable etc etc etc and they sort of freaked out and clammed up and wouldn't say anything more to him it was almost 15 years later as i recall that he was visiting again having learned his lesson again didn't find anything on the last night he was there one of the monks had been sort of his guide and in the intervening time period tischendorf had published an edition of the greek septuagint the greek translation of the old testament and he presented a copy of his version of the septuagint to the monk as a gift for having basically taken care of him during his stay the monk looked at him and he said well you know i have something like this and he went into his cell into his room and into his closet and he pulled out from the closet wrapped in red cloth a book and when he took the red cloth off tischendorf was staring at codex sinaiticus and he was looking at something that had been produced about 1500 years earlier it was not found in a trash can monks generally do not keep trash in red cloth in their cells but that's obviously it was considered very special and important to this person who owned it now there are numerous emendations and changes made to the text of sinaiticus that has a number of reasons first of all the text was utilized for a millennium and a half and what happened especially about 700 years after it was produced some really bright guy with too much time on his hands decided he was going to try to amend the text to make it read like the standard text of his day well the problem is the standard text of his day had changed and so it would be like taking your new american standard bible and trying to make it read like the new king james version there would be some places where that might work but you would have a whole lot of writing in the margin to try to make the two things look the same and this is in essence what happened about 700 years after the original writing now thankfully we are able to determine through paleography and through infrared examination and fluorescent examination and the use of technology and everything else we can differentiate the various writers on manuscripts especially on vellum manuscripts because for example i'm not sure if you're familiar with what a palimpsest is i think i mentioned it in the book but these were leather manuscripts that were written once and then they were you could actually wash the letters off and write something new on it well obviously when you write on leather you scar the surface somewhat and so we are able through the use of certain chemicals and lighting and so on and so forth to read what was previously written on a manuscript and have discovered biblical manuscripts that were very ancient that had been erased and used for a secular book or something like that maybe centuries or on down the road maybe the person who owned it very many centuries down the road wasn't a christian and had inherited this from an ancestor somewhere who didn't think the text was relevant anymore so he wiped it out and used it for something else so this was basically what was going on and so we are able to determine what the first hand of sinaiticus was what the second hand of sinaiticus was third hand of sinaiticus the various people down through well like I said 1500 years who had owned this book and had made notes and had made emendations and had circled things and so on and so forth and so we are able to much better than Burgon could have 100 years ago determine what the original readings of sinaiticus were in fact

Burgon has a fascinating discussion he argues it's very interesting he argues for theos in sinaiticus if I recall correctly if I recall his specific argumentation he said that he utilizing a brighter light felt that there was a line in the theta yeah yeah he had a whole argument about the fading exactly exactly line right right right he has a big long discussion about and personally

I think the external attestation on theos versus Haas at 1st

Timothy 316 is extremely close I think that the reading God should be given its due weight but the main thing is it's not some big conspiracy and the very fact that he would want to say that sinaiticus contained it demonstrated that he wasn't simply dismissing it he was reacting against the overuse of it and the over reliance upon it by Westcott and Hort now obviously what has happened since then is when you discover manuscripts like p66 p75 p46 these are papyri manuscripts that predate sinaiticus and vaticanus by a century and a half um...

move the the the standard basically that much farther back when they agree with sinaiticus and vaticanus over against the later byzantine text well i really think that if um...

if uh... uh... berg on had had that kind of information then he would have taken a different perspective than he did how many papyri have to have been found and and that pretty uh...

that's a good question uh... one of the best things i would suggest for folks to put on their uh...

their christmas list if you have christmas list is uh... uh... the addition of the national twenty -seventh edition that is published uh...

by the united bible societies because this thing is quite simply a uh...

an encyclopedia and if anyone does have a papyrus starting on page six eighty four uh... you have the list of each of the papyri for example pyrus one uh...

third century where it's uh... located and in its contents for example pyrus one only contains matthew chapter one versus the one through nine and then chapter twelve versus fourteen to twenty -five uh...

then you got pyrus two and this list through currently in the twenty -seventh edition uh...

they list through p ninety eight uh... so they're approximately ninety eight now not every single one of them predates sinaiticus for example uh...

p ninety seven is actually from the sixth or seventh century but you have a number of p ninety is from the second century uh...

p ninety one the third century and the biggies are p forty six which contains the pauline corpus which is around the year two hundred uh...

p sixty six which is also around two hundred which is the gospel of john and p seventy five which also contains uh...

the gospel of john and a little bit of luke also from around the third century so uh... those are the really big ones as far as uh...

being very complete very full and uh... having this kind of information and so there's about a hundred papyri manuscripts and there are more uh...

i can't get into a lot of details but uh... some folks are aware if you've read biblical archaeology review if you've got your ear to the ground i just only happen to know this because i know some folks that are very much involved in in textual critical studies there has been a major find uh...

in the mideast it's uh... it's not the biggest in the news the moment but uh...

i'll just put this way once it's found once it's uh... actually obtained uh...

it'll it'll probably will certainly require the nestle on twenty eighth edition uh... and in some sections uh...

it's not heavy in new testament there's old testament stuff but uh... it it it's it's definitely in league with the dead sea scrolls as far as uh...

uh... the weight that it will have uh... in new papyri manuscripts and more fines and and all sorts of neat fun wonderful stuff like that so uh...

more to come in the future shall we say uh... as uh... more information is found so uh...

realized the word corruption is a technical term amongst textual critics for variations in the text and uh...

that's why there's so many there's so much inside atticus is the thing was used for fifteen hundred years and it's uh...

not saying that the original version of it was uh... was just so wild and wacky that it's uh...

is is unusable just simply isn't the case and uh... so that's uh... hopefully that's a a fairly straightforward answer the question you're looking for my only other question would be back five years ago when i was reading that whenever he'd give an example of where he would well supposedly prove he thought he was proving anyway that uh...

what gotten court were wrong to change this or that and i would turn to my new american standard and find that it's it's still following what what's gotten court said well uh...

if you look at uh... the west gotten hort text and if you compare it uh...

the numerous there five years ago uh... there's a new edition of the nineteen ninety -five that's a nineteen seventy seven now uh...

the nineteen seventy seven edition numerous their bible i believe was based upon the national and twenty first edition or as the uh...

nineteen ninety -five update which is now the standard in a speed was based on the twenty -six edition and i know that there are a number of textual changes that were made between those two additions based upon of the changes in the national text itself and in general uh...

those changes have been away from uh... west gotten hort strange readings or have been based upon new papyri fines those are those are the basic uh...

uh... changes that have been made uh... over time as scholars continue to argue about uh...

the various readings and one of the things that i i would recommend to folks uh... if this is an area specially their study uh...

i realized that without knowing the language it's not overly useful but one of the big differences that i see as i for example hold in my hands right now my left hand i'm holding the the t r published by trinitarian bible society my right hand nasa on twenty seventh edition there are no textual variance listed in the t r they are listed in the uh...

nasa on text so when i look at person to three sixteen i see in the textual notes what manuscripts read what um...

i don't see that the t r and when i look at john one eighteen in the t r i don't see a textual notes but i do see that nasa on and there are king james only advocates i think it's a bad thing do you wait for example when after the new king james version of the bible for attacking uh...

for having textual footnotes what he didn't seem to realize is the king james version of the bible uh...

when it came out had the very same uh... type of uh... notes giving uh...

both alternate translations as well as textual variance uh... they just generally are not reproduced in modern versions of king james version of the bible uh...

but i think that it's it's very important that translations continue to provide the footnotes the n a s b in a new king james version uh...

did uh... in explaining to folks where there are variations uh...

and uh... i the reason i think that's very important is i realize that they're going to be young christians who are troubled by that but we've got to realize we no longer live in a quote unquote christian context in society there are people out there that are attacking the scriptures all the time we need to know our stuff to be able to do apologetics and so it's i think it's much better to address this issue within the context of faith and explain where the new testament came from uh...

where uh... the uh... that the whole discussion uh... originates why there are variations and do that within the context of the church than to have our young people running into it out at asu or at some secular university uh...

where a atheistic professors using it to beat them over the head and demonstrate they can't trust the bible i think we need to do that so we can have a foundation for apologetics and so uh...

uh... you you might be right uh... that the nasa on twenty first edition would be closer to the west gotten more text uh...

but of course remember dean berg on would not be citing references that were relevant either uh...

in other words he's he's picking and choosing right there and they're certainly differences between the nasa on twenty first in the west on vortex and they're even more between the any twenty seven and the west on vortex as well about those are based upon not you know a pre commitment to some sort of position but simply for the reflection for the study for the discussion for the discoveries that's the uh...

uh... you know that's the real issue okay okie dokie well thank you very much thank you very much sir for listening alright god bless eight six six eight five four six seven six three eight six six eight five four sixty seven sixty three is phone number i don't see any more little glowing lights over there whatsoever so i guess everyone has uh...

has heard everything that they needed to hear that it's very clear and uh...

no questions whatsoever and i'm not a jump on a by the chat room uh... uh... for uh...

not calling in today at all uh... i'll just press on with the powerpoint presentation will look at slide uh...

number twenty where did it go twenty seven slide number twenty seven for those of you who were following along and i think uh...

this is an extremely important point king james only literature abounds with examples of circular argumentation at this point once you've demonstrated for example in first in the three sixteen that there isn't some great conspiracy that the words they oz and haas especially is written in unseal tax are extremely close to one another uh...

what happens is you start getting circular argumentation and you need to keep in mind that for the vast majority of king james version only advocates this is the starting point in their thoughts and i provide this equation the king james bible alone equals the word of god alone that is the starting point in their thought when we realize this we can understand why they argue as they do in reality facts don't mean anything to the king james only person unless they're facts that can be used to prove their ultimate preconceived idea and if a fact if they accept fact a and that supports their position but fact b if thought of in the exact same way would disprove their position they'll ignore fact b and focus on fact a and if you point out that facts a and b taken together would be opposed to their perspective they'll call you a god hater and they will call you a person who's trying to destroy someone's faith in the bible believe me i can say this pretty much more than anyone else in the united states can say it because the biggest book out there the one that's most well known is the king james only controversy and i've got the files filled with the letters and the emails and everything else where these folks have just come unglued and go straight for the jugular and straight for the ad hominem and straight for the personal stuff and the reason is you've touched on the very center of their way of thinking and that is the king james bible alone they won't tell you which version it is but the king james bible alone equals the word of god alone and so to question that is to question the very heart and soul of their theology so keep that particular this particular thing in mind hey we've got we've got someone in the chat room that doesn't even know where to start in refuting all of my many mistakes thankfully he said just kidding because i i think he knows it probably wouldn't be wouldn't be good to take that particular track and i don't think he actually says i am hey we have we have a caller let me before you take a call really quickly we will pick up with i think i just go back to 27 and reiterate this next week because 28 continues on with that actually i won't be available next week but when we get around to it and let's go ahead and get a little more

ETS update and the only from our our our very regular caller who is probably colder than we are now up in Denver and hi

Randy hey you're always harping on the weather here but we're still raking leaves and t -shirts oh that's a bummer what's what's temperature out there today oh i don't know it's a little cooler it's probably in the high 60s but we're still happy because our sea buff knocked off number one