1 Sunday, Nvember 15, 2015 Grace Life Schl f Thelgy Frm This Generatin Fr Ever Lessn 8: Understanding Basic Terminlgy: Preservatin Intrductin/Review Last week, in Lessn 7, we cntinued ur cnsideratin f Basic Terminlgy by lking at the terms inspiratin and illuminatin. Essentially we defined inspiratin as the supernatural prcess whereby Gd the Hly Spirit mved upn human authrs t have them recrd in writing thse aspects f Gd s revelatin (written revelatin) that He wanted mankind t pssess frever (Isaiah 30:8). (Lessn 7) Furthermre, we studied the ccurrence f the wrd inspiratin in Jb 32:8 and learned that inspiratin was the supernatural prcess whereby Gd: 1) created the heavens and the earth (Psalms 33:6), 2) brught life t the first man Adam (Genesis 2:7), and 3) recrded in writing (graphē) thse aspects f His revelatin that He wanted mankind t pssess frever (II Timthy 3:16, Isaiah 30:8). This understanding f inspiratin helps ne understand hw the wrd f Gd can be quick and pwerful (Hebrews 4:12-13). Gd literally breathed His wn life int His wrd just as He did int mankind and all f creatin. Inspiratin sets the Bible apart frm any ther bk f antiquity. Secnd, we discussed illuminatin as a term used by thelgians t describe the prcess whereby the truth f Scripture gets ff the page and int the sul f the believer. Illuminatin is the spiritual prcess that ccurs in the inner man f the believer as Gd the Hly Spirit takes the written wrd f Gd that the Spirit wrte, and cmmunicates it t the believer s inner man. This is hw spiritual grwth and learning take place and hw sund dctrine is stred up in the believer s sul. I Crinthians 2:9-16 is the Pauline passage that sets frth the nrmative ministry f Gd the Hly Spirit in terms f illuminatin fr the bdy f Christ during the dispensatin f grace. Other passages such as Jhn 16:7-15 and I Jhn 2:20-27 describe illuminatin in terms Gd s dealings with the natin f Israel in time past and in the ages t cme. In this lessn we want t cnclude ur discussin f Basic Terminlgy by lking at sme infrmatin regarding preservatin as well as cnsider the terminlgical relatinships f all fur f ur basic terms: revelatin, inspiratin, illuminatin, and preservatin. Preservatin Preservatin deals with the prcess whereby the wrds f Scripture, given by inspiratin, are passed n frm generatin t generatin. Webster s 1828 Dictinary defines the English wrd preservatin as fllws: The act f preserving r keeping safe; the act f keeping frm injury, destructin r decay; as the preservatin f life r health; the preservatin f buildings frm fire r decay; the preservatin f grain frm insects; the preservatin f fruit r plants. When a Pastr Bryan Rss
2 thing is kept entirely frm decay, r nearly in its riginal state, we say it is in a high state f preservatin. Last week we bserved frm Dr. R.B. Ouellette s bk A Mre Sure Wrd: Which Bible Can Yu Trust? that... inspiratin was cmpleted in the past, preservatin began in the past and carries thrugh tday... (Ouellette, 34) There are a hst f verses that culd be used t establish this dctrine. Psalms 33:11 The cunsel f the Lrd standeth fr ever, the thughts f his heart t all generatins. Psalms 105:5 He hath remembered his cvenant fr ever, the wrd which he cmmanded t a thusand generatins. Psalms 119:89 Fr ever, O LORD, thy wrd is settled in heaven. Psalms 119:111 Thy testimnies have I taken as an heritage fr ever: fr they are the rejicing f my heart. Psalms 119:152 Cncerning thy testimnies, I have knwn f ld that thu hast funded them fr ever. Psalms 119:160 Thy wrd is true frm the beginning: and every ne f thy righteus judgments endureth fr ever. Isaiah 30:8 Nw g, write it befre them in a table, and nte it in a bk, that it may be fr the time t cme fr ever and ever. Isaiah 40:8 The grass withereth, the flwer fadeth: but the wrd f ur Gd shall stand fr ever. Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my wrds shall nt pass away. I Peter 1:23-25 Being brn again, nt f crruptible seed, but f incrruptible, by the wrd f Gd, which liveth and abideth fr ever. 24) Fr all flesh is as grass, and all the glry f man as the flwer f grass. The grass withereth, and the flwer theref falleth away: 25) But the wrd f the Lrd endureth fr ever. And this is the wrd which by the gspel is preached unt yu. Regarding this passage Ouellete pints that this is a qutatin f Isaiah 40, (see abve) and thereby serves as an indirect prf that this Scripture had already been preserved fr ver seven hundred years. (Ouellette, 33) One will ntice that I did nt include Psalms 12:6-7 in the preceding list. This was dne n purpse t make a pint. Psalms 12:6-7 is shruded in sme cntrversy as t whether r nt Gd is preserving his wrds r his peple. Fr the sake f clarity, I am nt abandning this Pastr Bryan Rss
3 passage t the ppsitin. We will deal with it in great detail and specificity when we study preservatin. Fr nw what I am saying is that ne des nt need Psalms 12:6-7 t understand and establish the dctrine f preservatin. The verses utlined abve establish the dctrine quite clearly withut needing t appeal t the passage in questin. Accrding t R.B. Ouellette, the verses quted abve are sufficient fr establishing the dctrine f preservatin irrespective f Psalms 12:6-7. There are seminaries that exist tday that seem t explain away every verse that teaches preservatin. I have a prblem with sme wh feel that verses r dctrine must be explained away. I prefer t read the Bible and understand it literally. When Gd says His wrd will last frever, that it will last fr a thusand generatins, I believe that means Gd will preserve His wrd frever. In the Bible, the writers had n prblem quting Scripture that had been preserved up t that time. Peter qutes Isaiah 40 (I Peter 1:23-25); Paul qutes extensively frm the Old Testament in Rmans 9-11. Each time a New Testament writer qutes frm the Old Testament, he is demnstrating that Gd has been able t preserve His wrd. Preservatin is highly debated tday because ultimately, the preservatin issue will decide the translatin issue and preservatin is cmpletely a matter f faith in Gd s pwer. (Ouellette, 33) Elsewhere Ouellette states the fllwing regarding Matthew 24:35, Psalms 119:60, and Psalms 119:89 (see list f verses abve): It sunds t me as thugh Gd is teaching us a dctrine f preservatin. The Scriptures clearly teach that even if Heaven and Earth were t pass away, the wrds wuld nt. We are clearly taught that the righteus judgements f Gd endures frever, and that His Wrd has been frever settled in Heaven. (Ouellette, 47) We have already seen in Lessn 3 that any discussin f the dctrine f preservatin is largely mitted frm the Systematic Thelgy bks authred by the fllwing leading Evangelical authrs. Nrman L. Geisler Systematic Thelgy, Vlume I Lewis Sherry Chaffer Systematic Thelgy Charles C. Ryrie Basic Thelgy Paul Enns Mdy Handbk f Thelgy Wayne Grudem Systematic Thelgy: An Intrductin t Christian Dctrine Millard J. Ericksn Christian Thelgy Alister McGrath Christian Thelgy: An Intrductin Charles F. Baker A Dispensatinal Thelgy Pastr Bryan Rss
4 When nt utright silent n the dctrine f preservatin, Ouellette pints ut that many within Evangelical academia seek t explain away the clear teaching f Scripture with respect t preservatin. Ouellette cites the fllwing statements issued by Detrit Baptist Thelgical Seminary (DBTS) and Grdn Fee in his bk The Textual Criticism f the New Testament as a case in pint. While the Bible teaches the ultimate indestructibility f the verbal revelatin f Gd (Matthew 24:35; I Peter 1:25), it des nt tell us hw and where the written manuscript linage f that wrd is preserved. We believe that Gd has prvidentially preserved His Wrd in the many manuscripts, fragments, versins, translatins, and cpies f the Scripture that are available and that by diligent study, cmparisn, and crrelatin, the riginal text (wrds) can be ascertained. We therefre hld that the integrity f any text type, translatin, versin, r cpy f the Scriptures is t be judged by the autgraphs (riginal manuscript) nly... (DBTS Statement frm 1996 quted in Ouellette, 47-48) The dctrine f preservatin f Scripture... is nt a dctrine that is explicitly taught in Scripture, nr is it the belief that Gd has perfectly and miraculusly preserved every wrd f the riginal autgraphs in ne manuscript r text-type. It is the belief that Gd has prvidently preserved His Wrd in and thrugh all the extant manuscripts, versins, and ther cpies f Scripture... Gd has wnderfully and prvidently preserved His Wrd in a multiplicity f extant manuscripts. N passage f Scripture prmises this, but the evidence f histry leaves n dubt that such is the case. (Fee, 420 quted in Ouellette, 50) In respnse t these tw statements quted abve, Dr. Ouellette states: Based n this view, hw can the Christian be sure that he has the right wrds which nes did Gd preserve and which nes did ver-zealus scribes add? Apparently he must diligently cmpare, crrelate, and study the manuscripts, fragments, versins, translatins, and cpies f scripture that are available. The statement made abve sunds academic, thelgical, and spiritual, but it has n practical value t a searching Christian. The end f the lgic, if yu hld t that statement, is that, due t ur endless cmparisns and discvery, we cannt ever believe that we have the authritative Wrd f Gd in English... There are serius prblems with the lgic that is used t cme t such cnclusins and with the bvius denial f a basic Bible prmise. Fr example, we read that n passage f Scripture prmises preservatin. This is simply a false statement. All wuld agree that the riginals were given by inspiratin f Gd there is n rm fr questin r debate cncerning inspiratin. Again, we have n inspired riginals tday. Therefre, when smene states that we are t determine the accuracy f the cpies we have based upn their crrelatin t the riginal autgraphs, we find urselves in an indefinable psitn. The Bible can n lnger be ur final authrity. Rather, we must lk t Gd s wrking in histry and t the expert pinins f schlars t validate ur translatins. Thse wh wuld hld t the Critical Text psitn believe we can knw by studying histry that Gd has preserved His Wrd. Yet, hw can ne knw by lking at histry, when, t begin with, n ne knws what it lked like? There is n way that histrical bservatin can give dcumented prf that nthing has been changed. This is against the laws f scientific bservatin. Our psitin n preservatin must be a faith-based apprach. Certainly this is a watershed issue, but we must let the Bible speak fr itself. Pastr Bryan Rss
5... issues related t the biblical text are matters f faith regardless f which side f the issue ne takes. Textual schlarship shuld nt perate slely upn scientific principles as thugh there was nthing divine abut the rigin f ur Bible. The Bible des have smething t say abut its wn preservatin, thus necessitating a dctrine f preservatin. Bible-believing Christians, whether ministers r laymen, must g abut the prcess f identifying the crrect biblical text within the cntext f the biblical dctrine f preservatin. The questin that must be answered is: Fr what will yu trust the schlars, and which schlars will yu trust?... While there is mre t what the Bible says abut its wn preservatin, enugh has been given t demnstrate that thse wh take the Critical Text apprach t the textual issue have t explain away under the guise f schlarship what the Bible clearly teaches. Fr nw, it is imprtant t remember that nt nly is the dctrine f preservatin diluted r deleted, but that there is als a subtle attack n dctrinal purity as well. (Ouellette, 48-52) In a later chapter Ouellette summarizes his thughts regarding preservatin with the fllwing statement, Thse wh advcate the Westctt and Hrt psitin (i.e., the Critical Text) always have truble with the preservatin issue because it negates their practice. In the questin f Bible translatins, ne either has a preserved Bible r a restred, recnstructed Bible. (Ouellette, 83) The central questin is: D we have a preserved wrd r a restred, recnstructed wrd? Majrity Text prpnent Wilbur Pickering cntributed an essay titled Jhn William Burgn and the New Testament t David Otis Fuller s 1973 publicatin True r False? In additin t prving that Burgn believed in inspiratin, preservatin, and inerrancy, Pickering states the fllwing abut the need fr preservatin.... if the Scriptures have nt been preserved then the dctrine f Inspiratin is a purely academic matter with n relevance fr us tday. If we d nt have the inspired wrds r d nt knw precisely which they be, then the dctrine f Inspiratin is inapplicable. (Fuller, 269) While it is necessary t acknwledge the Bible s wn teaching regarding preservatin, it is equally imprtant nt t demand mre frm the dctrine than can be histrically and/r textually prven. Regarding the dctrine f preservatin Dr. Edward F. Hills states the fllwing in The King James Versin Defended: If the dctrine f divine inspiratin f the Old and New Testament Scripture is a true dctrine, the dctrine f the prvidential preservatin f the Scriptures must als be a true dctrine. It must be that dwn thrugh the centuries Gd has exercised a special prvidential cntrl ver the cpying f the Scriptures and the preservatin and use f the cpies, s that trustwrthy representatives f the riginal text have been available t Gd s peple in every age. Gd must have dne this, fr if He gave the Scriptures t His Church by inspiratin as the perfect and final revelatin f His will, then it is bvius that Pastr Bryan Rss
6 He wuld nt allw this revelatin t disappear r underg any alteratin f its fundamental character. Althugh this dctrine f the prvidential preservatin f the Old and New Testament Scriptures has smetimes been misused, nevertheless, it als has been held, either implicitly r explicitly, by all branches f the Christian Church as a necessary cnsequent f the divine inspiratin f these Scriptures. (Hills, 2) Please nte that even Dr. Hills acknwledges what preservatin des and des nt assure. Preservatin des nt assure the exact sameness r verbatim wrding acrss every manuscript cpy ever made. Rather preservatin secures that Gd will nt allw his revelatin t disappear r underg any alteratin f its fundamental character. (Hills, 2) Elsewhere in The King James Bible Defended, when discussing the minr differences that exist in the varius editins f the TR, Dr. Hills recgnizes a difference between what he calls prvidential and miraculus preservatin. The texts f the several editins f the Textus Receptus were Gd-guided. They were set up under the leading f Gd s special prvidence. Hence the differences between them were kept t a minimum. But these disagreements were nt eliminated altgether, fr this wuld require nt merely prvidential guidance but a miracle. In shrt, Gd chse t preserve the New Testament text prvidentially rather than miraculusly, and this is why even the several editins f the Textus Receptus vary frm each ther slightly. (Hills, 222-223) In rder t accmplish preservatin f exact sameness Gd wuld have had t supernaturally vertake the pen f every scribe, cpyist, typesetter, and printer wh ever handled the text t ensure that n differences f any kind ever entered the text. That Gd did nt chse t accmplish preservatin in this manr is apparent because there are slight differences even in the manuscripts cmprising the Byzantine Text Type nt t mentin the varius editins f the TR. This is where we must recgnize the difference between: 1) different ways f saying the same thing and 2) substantive differences in meaning. The manuscripts f the Byzantine Text Type as well as the varius editins f the TR cntain an agreement as t the dctrinal cntent f the readings. Cnversely, when the TR is cmpared with the Critical Text there are substantive differences in meaning as t the dctrinal cntent f the readings. Psalms 12:6-7 what the dctrine f preservatin assures is exactly what verse six states, namely the preservatin f a Pure Text i.e., a text that des nt reprt infrmatin abut Gd, His nature r character, His dctrine, His dispensatinal dealings with mankind, histry, archelgy, r science that is FALSE. In shrt, Gd s prmise t preserve His wrd assures the existence f a text that has nt been altered in its fundamental character despite nt being preserved in a state f exact sameness. If exact sameness were the issue with Gd in preservatin then why did He nt just preserve the riginals and remve all dubt? The main reasn is that Gd, at every turn, is testing the believer t see if he r she is ging t walk by faith in what Gd said. I Crinthians 1:27-29, 2:5 Pastr Bryan Rss
7 Hebrews 11:6 I believe that Gd preserved his wrd fr the same reasn I believe that Gd inspired it. Preservatin is the Bible s claim fr itself. The dctrine f preservatin impacts hw ne ught t lk at the textual and translatinal issues and ensures that we have mre than just a shell f the riginal Bible as the Originals Only psitn maintains. Wrks Cited Fee, Grdn D. The Textual Criticism f the New Testament in Expsitr s Bible Cmmentary (Ed. Frank Gaebelein). Grand Rapids, MI: Zndervan, 1979. Hills, Edward F. The King James Versin Defended. Des Mines: IA, Christian Research Press, 1956. Jrdan, Richard. Manuscript Evidence 101. Grace Schl f the Bible. Ouellette, R.B. A Mre Sure Wrd: Which Bible Can yu Trust? Lancaster, CA: Striving Tgether Publicatins, 2008. Pickering, Wilbur N. Jhn William Burgn and the New Testament in Ture r False? (Ed. David Otis Fuller). Grand Rapids, MI: Grand Rapids Internatinal Publicatins, 1973. Pastr Bryan Rss