The Study of the Scriptures
Session 8, Wednesday 13 MAY 2015
Faith Baptist Fellowship Church
Lake Ariel, PA
Note:
There was no audio recording of this session.
Review Sessions 1-7
The Means God Uses: The Scriptures, the Holy Spirit, and
the Church
“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have
eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” (John 5:39)
1. Placing trust
in God: The ability of God and the sufficiency of the Scriptures — Coming to
the Scriptures with Faith
2. Putting man in
his place: The inability of fallen man and an understanding of the responses of
the creature to the revelation of God — Coming to the Scriptures with Humility
3.
The Unity of the Word of God: the First, Progressive, and Full Mention
Principles of Interpretation — Coming to the Scriptures with Hope
4. The Diversity
of the Contexts within the Canon of Scripture — Coming to the Scriptures with Respect
5.
The Humiliation of Incarnational Hermeneutics — Coming to the Scriptures
with Caution
6. Putting the
Scriptures in their Place: The Historical Perspective in Bible Study — Coming
to the Scriptures with Perspective
7. Familiarity
Breeds Contempt - Coming to the Scriptures without Presumption
The Original Texts and the Translations of the
Scriptures
The trajectory from the original manuscripts in Hebrew,
Greek and Aramaic to what you have in your hands
Dunzweiler’s “Seven Steps”
Robert J. Dunzweiler,
Are
the Bibles in our Possession Inspired? Two Studies on the Inspiredness of the
Apographs, IBRI Research Report #5 (1981); in the “Robert J. Dunzweiler
Memorial Library” on the
Interdisciplinary
Biblical Research Institute at
http://www.dunzweilerlib.ibri.org/RR005/05inspiration.htm
[accessed 12 MAY 2015].
Robert J. Dunzweiler, “Inspiration, “Inspiredness,” and
the Proclamation of God’s Word Today,” in Interpretation
& History: Essays in Honor of Allan A. MacRae, eds. R. Laird Harris,
Swee-Hwa Quek, and J. Robert Vannoy (Singapore: Christian Life Publishers,
1986), pp. 185-199.
I. The Translation and Translations of the Scriptures
This is Dunzweiler’s “Step Five.”
Psalm Singers — metrical paraphrases and the source of
the tunes
Syrian Orthodox priests praying in Aramaic
Latin Bibles chained to the “churches” — anyone caught
translating the Scriptures into the vernacular was burned at the stake
The LXX — its usage by Christ and the Apostles, and consistent
approaches to translation
The form of the inspired quotations from the Old
Testament in the New Testament
Ancient versions of the New Testament:
Italic (Old Latin), Vulgate (Latin), Syriac, Coptic,
Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic
Awareness of extreme views on these issues:
In seminary: “If I believed what you do, and thought for
one minute that there was even one error in the King James Bible, I would get
out of the pulpit, and never preach again!”
In a business parking lot: “Modern Translations — The
Word of God? Yes, or no?
(“King James Only” vs. “Only the King James”)
In a church following a worship service: “When I realized
that you were not preaching from the King James Bible I closed my Bible, and
shut my ears!”
The history of English Bible translation:
Pre-1611 and the Geneva Bible vs. the Bishops’ Bible
controversy
Post-1611 and the errors in the early editions of the
King James Bible
1881 to the modern era
What if you only had one Bible translation available?
We would not be having this conversation!
Enter the Kimyal!
“The
Kimyal Tribe of Papua, Indonesia celebrate the arrival of the New Testament
Bible in the Kimyal language.”
“This video captures the moment when the Kimyal
tribe of West Papua, Indonesia, received a shipment of New
Testaments—translated into their own language for the first time.”
“This 5-minute video shows the
emotions of the Kimyal community in West Papua, Indonesia, as they receive the
first copies of the New Testament in their language. Dancing, weeping and
praying, the Kimyal people welcome God's Word into their remote village and
talk of how it will change their lives.
Work on the translation of the New
Testament into Kimyal was begun in 1963 by Regions Beyond Mission Union (now
World Team) missionaries Phil and Phyliss Masters who moved to West Papua,
Indonesia, to evangelise the Kimyal people. Sadly, Phil Masters and a fellow
missionary Stan Dale were killed by members of the neighbouring Yali tribe and
the translation work was halted. However, the work eventually resumed and the
New Testament was completed in early 2010 by a Kimyal translation team led by
another World Team missionary, Rosa Kidd.
The Kimyal translators Welega Pusup
and Menas Mirin, who had received instruction in translation principles during
UBS Translation Workshops, played a key role in the translation team. UBS
Translation Consultant Dr Lourens de Vries was also involved in ensuring the
high standard of the translation. As is the case with many other translation
projects in Indonesian Papua, the Kimyal project was a joint effort of the
mission, the regional and local churches, the Indonesian Bible Society and UBS,
each contributing crucial elements to the translation project.
The Kimyal New Testament was
published by the Indonesian Bible Society in March 2010, and was welcomed by
the community during a highly emotional celebration in Korupun, West Papua.
The video footage was shot by
Dianne Becker”
We in the English speaking world have been blessed beyond
compare in the history of the Church with a wealth of translations. However,
all translations are not equal.
Almost every Christian publisher
has entered into the competition with their “stable of scholars”:
Crossway: The English Standard Version (2001, 2008)
Holman: The Holman Christian Standard Bible
(1999, 2000, 2002, 2003)
Moody: The New American Standard Bible (1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972,
1973)
Oxford: The Revised Standard Version (1946, 1952),
The
New English Bible (1961, 1970)
Tyndale: The New Living Translation (1996)
Thomas Nelson: American Standard Version (1901, 1929);
The
New King James Bible (1979, 1980,
1982)
Zondervan, now Hendrikson: The Modern Language Bible (1945, 1959, 1969);
The
New International Version (1970,
1973, 1975, 1976, 1978)
Differences in translations
is one of degree, not kind
Textual differences
Translation differences
Formal equivalence versus dynamic equivalence in
translations
Dynamic equivalence is an issue of degree not of kind
Dynamic equivalence is not just about the NIV, and other
modern translations!
Dynamic equivalence translations are found throughout the 17th century King
James Version also. A glaring example of this is Acts 12:4 —
And when he had apprehended him,
he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of
soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
Another that is often cited has to do with the rendering, “God
forbid!”
Luke 20:16 — He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and
shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
Rom 3:4 — God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a
liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and
mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Rom 3:6 — God forbid: for then how shall God judge the
world?
Rom 3:31 — Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid:
yea, we establish the law.
Rom 6:2 — God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin,
live any longer therein?
Rom 6:15 — What then? shall we sin, because we are not under
the law, but under grace? God forbid
Rom 7:7 — What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the
law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Rom 7:13 — Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid.
But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good;
that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Rom 9:14 — What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Rom 11:1 — I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid.
For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Rom 11:11 — I say then, Have they stumbled that they should
fall? God forbid:
but rather through their fall
salvation is come unto the Gentiles,
for to provoke them to jealousy.
1Cor 6:15 — Know ye not that your bodies are the members of
Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.
Gal 2:17 — But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ,
we ourselves also are found sinners, is
therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
Gal 3:21 — Is the
law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given
which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Gal 6:14 — But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our
Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the
world.
My questions to the translator would be: “What are you
translating? Where did you get that from? Are you translating the concept, the
thought behind the words, or the words?”
Another issue that the translators of the King James
Version intentionally worked into the finished product as documented in their
“Preface to the Readers” was to translate the same original word in the same
context by a variety of synonyms in order to avoid repetition, and to create
what they felt was a more beautiful translation in the target language. They
may have accomplished what they set out to do, but at the expense of obscuring
what was there in the original language for their readers. A prime example of
this is the translation of a single verb that is found 23 times in 1 John 2-4:
Chapter 2
6 He that saith he
abideth
in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.
10 He
that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion
of stumbling in him.
14 I
have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men,
because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked
one.
17 And
the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God
abideth
for ever.
19 They
went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they
would no doubt have continued
with us: but they went out, that they
might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
24 Let
that therefore abide
in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard
from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue
in the Son, and in the Father.
27 But
the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that
any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is
truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in
him.
28 And now, little
children, abide
in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed
before him at his coming.
Chapter
3
6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not:
whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
9 Whosoever is
born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot
sin, because he is born of God.
14 We
know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He
that loveth not his brother abideth
in death.
15 Whosoever
hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal
life abiding
in him.
17 But whoso hath
this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth
the love of God in him?
24 And
he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we
know that he abideth
in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
Chapter
4
12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we
love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in
us.
13 Hereby
know we that we dwell
in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
15 Whosoever shall
confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16 And
we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he
that dwelleth
in love dwelleth
in God, and God in him.
Note that of the 23 occurrences of this verb in 1 John
2-4 it was rendered by the King James translators 12 times by “abide,” and 11
times by other words viewed as synonyms: “dwell” (7), “continue” (2), and
“remain” (2).
The end result is that the drum beat of the repetition to
be found in the original is lost, and the reader would never suspect that the
same word is the source in the original language. Other translations are guilty
of doing the same. None are exempt from this. There may be occasions where a
different shade of meaning is indicated in a given context, and a synonym
communicating a different connotation would be more appropriate. The point is
not that a specific Greek or Hebrew word must always be translated by a
specific word in the target language. However, in cases like that illustrated
from 1 John 2-4 that is not the case.
My questions in this case to the translators would be:
“Why are you using a different word? Did the meaning
change due to something going on in the context? No? Then why are you using a
different word? Because you think that it sounds better?”
The doctrine of
the inspiration of the scriptures, theories of the inspiration of the
scriptures, and the engine that drives modern approaches to translation
The influence of Eugene Nida and modern linguistic
theories
Translation as a science
and as an art
Punctuation
Adding italicized words
Translating emphases, e.g.,
due to word position
Language is not just vocabulary — language includes
grammar and syntax
What are we to do with the ancient idioms?
The place of
translation, and translators exceeding their warrant
Translation should not make an end run around the pulpit!
There is a place for exposition. It is in the pulpit, and in the teaching
meetings of the Church.
On the issues related to modern translation approaches the
following are highly recommended:
Wayne Grudem, Leland Ryken, C. John Collins, Vern S.
Poythress, and Bruce Winter, Translating
Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation (Wheaton:
Crossway, 2005).
Leland Ryken, Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible
Translation Difficulties (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005).
Leland Ryken, Understanding English Bible Translation: The
Case For An Essentially Literal Translation (Wheaton: Crossway, 2009).
Leland Ryken, The Word of God in English: Criteria for
Excellence in Bible Translation (Wheaton: Crossway, 2002).
What does this
leave us with?
There are no perfect translations. The work of
translation does not equate to that of the inspiration of the original
manuscripts. The work goes on.
There are no perfect Christians or churches this side of
glory. The perfect will of God is still being done.
What if you only had one Bible translation available?
We would not be having this conversation!
Remember the Kimyal!
II. The Text of the Scriptures and Textual Criticism
This takes us to the issue of what is being translated.
This is Dunzweiler’s “Step Four.”
Texts without a
text
We do not have the original manuscripts to provide an
absolute standard
We must deal with what has been preserved, the extant
manuscripts, versions, lectionaries, and citations from the ancient authors
There is no getting around the need for the ongoing work
of textual criticism
The issue revolves around how this is to proceed
There is division over this, but not in what is being
used as the basis for modern translations
The accuracy of
transmission
Robert Dick Wilson on the Old Testament; B. B. Warfield
and John H. Skilton on the New Testament
The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls
The fascination
with antiquity in the 19th century, and manuscript discoveries
Why did those manuscripts survive in Egypt, Sinai, etc., and not others, e.g., in the Byzantine Empire? Climate!
The legacy of the text
critical theories of Westcott, Hort and others
The mushrooming of conjectures and subjectivity in
textual decisions coupled with prejudicial weighting of a select few
manuscripts based on their age, i.e.,
temporal proximity to the original manuscripts
Subjective value
judgments concerning the relative merit of individual manuscripts
Marginal readings or footnotes in translations may
exhibit subjective value judgments, i.e.
“the best manuscripts,” “the most trustworthy manuscripts,” “the most reliable
manuscripts,” etc.
Who says so? What makes them so? Are you really sure
about this, or have you actually prejudged the issue?
The following are highly recommended on this subject:
Maurice A. Robinson, “The Case For Byzantine Priority,”
in Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont,
The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform 2005
(Southborough, MA: Chilton Book Publishing, 2005), pp. 533-586; previously published online in
TC: A Journal of Biblical Criticism, Vol. 6 (2001)
at
http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v06/Robinson2001.html [accessed 8 MAR 2012]; and originally presented to the “Symposium on
New Testament Studies: A Time for Reappraisal,” at Southeastern Baptist
Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, NC on 6-7 APR 2000.
Jakob Van Bruggen, The
Ancient Text of the New Testament (Winnipeg; Premier, 1976).
______________________________________________________________________________
Textual Criticism: Personal Case Studies:
Mark 1:41 — Was Jesus Filled With Compassion or Indignation?
(27 MAR 2013)
Luke 22:43-44 (12-19 DEC 2012)
Acts 9:4-6 (9-12 DEC 2013; 3 JAN 2015)
Acts 12:25 — Whither
Paul and Barnabas: To and/or Fro? (29 MAR — 3 APR 2014)
Acts 20:28 — the
church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood
(16-19,
23-24 JUL 2014)
Acts 24:6b-8a (21 MAR 2015)
Romans 14:14 — through
Him (30 JUN and 23 AUG 2011; 18 APR 2015)
1 Thessalonians 2:7 — Gentle
vs. Infants/Babes/Children (31 DEC
2014; 18 FEB 2015)
1 John 5:7 — The
Comma Johanneum (20 MAR 2014)
______________________________________________________________________________
What if you only had one Bible translation available?
We would not be having this conversation!
Remember the Kimyal!
Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solus Christus, Soli Deo Gloria,
John T. “Jack” Jeffery
Pastor, Wayside Gospel Chapel
Greentown, PA
10 MAY 2015
Revised:
12 MAY 2015
13 MAY 2015
14 MAY 2015
Appendix A: Bibliography - Recommended Collateral Reading List
Reidar Aasgaard, “Brothers
in Brackets? A Plea for Rethinking the Use of [ ] in NA/UBS” Journal for the Study of the New Testament
26:3 (2004), pp. 301-321.
Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions
and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, trans. Erroll
F. Rhodes (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987; from Der Text des Neuen Testaments,
Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellshcaft, 1981).
David Alan Black, Darrell Bock, Keith Elliott, Maurice
Robinson, and Daniel Wallace, Perspectives
of the Ending of Mark: 4 Views, ed. David Alan Black (Nashville: B&H
Academic, 2008).
F. F. Bruce, The
Books and the Parchments, rev. ed. (Westwood, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, 1963,
1950).
F. F. Bruce, History
of the Bible in English: From the earliest versions, 3rd rev. ed. (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1978, 1970, 1961; originally published as The English Bible).
F. F. Bruce, The
New Testament Documents, 5th rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1943; originally published as Are The New Testament Documents Reliable?).
Dave Brunn, One Bible, Many Versions: Are
All Translations Created Equal?
(Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2013).
John William Burgon, The Causes of the Corruption of the
Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels, being the Sequel to “The Traditional Text
of the Holy Gospels.” (London:
George Bell and Sons, 1896).
John William Burgon, The Revision Revised. Three Articles
Reprinted from the Quarterly Review: I. The New Greek Text. II. The New English
Version. III. Westcott and Hort's New Textual Theory. To which is added a Reply
to Bishop Ellicott's Pamphlet in Defence of the Revisers and their Greek Text
of the New Testament: Including a Vindication of the Traditional Reading of 1
Timothy III. 16 (London:
John Murray, 1883).
John William Burgon, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels
Vindicated and Established (London: George Bell and Sons, 1896).
D. A. Carson, The
King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism (Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1979).
Kent D. Clarke, “Textual
Certainty in the UBS' GNT,” Novum
Testamentum 44:2 (2002), pp. 105-133.
Rodney J. Decker, The
English Bible (Kansas City, MO: Calvary Bible College and Theological
Seminary, 1993).
Robert J. Dunzweiler,
Are
the Bibles in our Possession Inspired? Two Studies on the Inspiredness of the
Apographs, IBRI Research Report #5 (1981); in the “Robert J. Dunzweiler
Memorial Library” on the
Interdisciplinary
Biblical Research Institute at
http://www.dunzweilerlib.ibri.org/RR005/05inspiration.htm
[accessed 12 MAY 2015].
Robert J. Dunzweiler, “Inspiration, “Inspiredness,” and
the Proclamation of God’s Word Today,” in Interpretation
& History: Essays in Honor of Allan A. MacRae, eds. R. Laird Harris,
Swee-Hwa Quek, and J. Robert Vannoy (Singapore: Christian Life Publishers,
1986), pp. 185-199.
Virtus E. Gideon, “The Longer Ending of Mark in Recent
Study,” in New Testament Studies: Essays
in Honor of Ray Summers in his Sixty-Fifth Year, eds. Huber L. Drumwright
and Curtis Vaughan (Waco, TX: Markham Press Fund, 1975), pp. 3-12.
J. Harold Greenlee, The
Text of the New Testament: From Manuscript to Modern Edition (Peabody, MA:
Hendrikson Publishers, Inc., 2008; rev. Scribes,
Scrolls, and Scripture, Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,
1985).
Wayne Grudem, Leland Ryken, C. John Collins, Vern S.
Poythress, and Bruce Winter, Translating
Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation (Wheaton:
Crossway, 2005).
Edward F. Hills, The
King James Version Defended, 4th ed. (Des Moines, IA: The Christian
Research Press, 1956, 1973, 1984).
Neil R. Lightfoot, How
We Got the Bible, 3rd ed., rev. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1963, 1988,
2003).
Allan A. MacRae, Biblical
Christianity: Letters from Professor Allan A MacRae, PhD (Singapore:
Christian Life Publishers, 1994), pp.
13-69, 138-139.
Robert P. Martin, Accuracy
of Translation and the New International Version: The Primary Criterion in
Evaluating Bible Versions (Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1989).
Douglas R. McLachlan, Larry D. Pettegrew, Roy E. Beacham,
and W. Edward Glenny, The Bible Version
Debate: The Perspective of Central Baptist Seminary (Minneapolis, MN:
Central Baptist Theological Seminary, 1997).
Bruce M.
Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the
Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek
New Testament (third edition) (Stuttgart, Germany: United Bible
Societies, 1971).
Wilbur N. Pickering, The
Identity of the New Testament Text, rev. ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1977, 1980).
Robert L. Plummer, 40 Questions about Interpreting the Bible,
series ed. Benjamin L. Merkle (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic &
Professional, 2011), pp. 47-55, 69-75.
Maurice A. Robinson, “The Case For Byzantine Priority,”
in Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont,
The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform 2005
(Southborough, MA: Chilton Book Publishing, 2005), pp. 533-586; previously published online in
TC: A Journal of Biblical Criticism, Vol. 6 (2001)
at
http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/v06/Robinson2001.html [accessed 8 MAR 2012]; and originally presented to the “Symposium on
New Testament Studies: A Time for Reappraisal,” at Southeastern Baptist
Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, NC on 6-7 APR 2000.
Maurice A. Robinson, “Investigating Text-Critical
Dichotomy: A Critique of Modern Eclectic Praxis from a Byzantine-Priority
Perspective,” paper presented March 19, 1999 at the ETS Southeastern Regional
Meeting, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (Wake Forest, NC), Faith and Mission 16:2 (Spring 1999),
pp. 16-29.
Maurice A. Robinson, “The Recensional Nature of the
Alexandrian Text-Type: A Response to Selected Criticisms of the
Byzantine-Priority Theory,” Faith and
Mission 11:1 (Fall 1993), pp. 46-69.
Maurice A. Robinson, “Two Passages in Mark: A Critical
Test for the Byzantine-Priority Hypothesis,” paper delivered November 17-19,
1994 at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society (Chicago,
IL), Faith and Mission 13:2 (Spring
1996), pp. 66-99.
Leland Ryken, Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible
Translation Difficulties (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005).
Leland Ryken, The Legacy of the King James Bible:
Celebrating 400 Years of the Most Influential English Translation (Wheaton:
Crossway, 2011).
Leland Ryken, Understanding English Bible Translation: The
Case For An Essentially Literal Translation (Wheaton: Crossway, 2009).
Leland Ryken, The Word of God in English: Criteria for
Excellence in Bible Translation (Wheaton: Crossway, 2002).
Frederick Henry
Ambrose Scrivener, A Plain Introduction
to the Criticism of the New Testament for the Use of Biblical Students, 2
vols., 4th ed., ed. Edward Miller (New York: George Bell & Sons, 1894).
John H. Skilton,
“The Transmission of the Scriptures,” in The
Infallible Word, eds. N. B. Stonehouse and Paul Woolley (Philadelphia:
Presbyterian and Reformed, 1946), pp. 141-195.
Harry A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament
Textual Criticism (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984).
“The Translators to the Readers, Preface to the King
James Version 1611
,”
in
The Holy Bible, 1611 Edition, King James Version (Nashville: Thomas
Nelson Publishers, 1982),
on
Christian Classics Ethereal Library
(CCEL) at
http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/pref1.htm [accessed 4 MAY 2013]; see esp. “
Reasons Moving Us To Set Diversity Of Senses In The
Margin, Where There Is Great Probability For Each,”
on
Christian
Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) at
http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/pref10.htm [accessed 4 MAY 2013].
Jakob Van Bruggen, The
Ancient Text of the New Testament (Winnipeg; Premier, 1976).
Jakob Van Bruggen, The
Future of the Bible (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1978).
Daniel B. Wallace, “Challenges In New Testament Textual Criticism For The Twenty-First
Century,” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 52:1 (Mar 2009), pp. 79-100.
Daniel B. Wallace,
“The Gospel According To Bart: A Review Article Of Misquoting Jesus By Bart
Ehrman,” Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 49:2 (Jun 2006), pp. 327-349.
Daniel B. Wallace, ““The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text”: A
Review Article,” Grace Theological
Journal 4:1 (Spring 1983), pp. 119-126.
Daniel B. Wallace, “Inspiration, Preservation, and New Testament Textual Criticism,”
Grace Theological Journal 12:1
(Spring 1991), pp. 21-50.
Daniel B. Wallace, “The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical?”
Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (Apr
1991), pp. 151-169.
Daniel B. Wallace, “The Majority-Text Theory: History, Methods And Critique,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 37:2 (Jun 1994), pp. 185-215.
Daniel B. Wallace, “Some Second Thoughts on the Majority Text,” Bibliotheca Sacra 146:583 (Jul 1989), pp.
270-290.
Daniel B. Wallace, ““The Text of the New Testament”: A Review Article,” Grace Theological Journal 9:2 (Fall
1988), pp. 279-285.
P. D. Wegner, A
Student’s Guide To Textual Criticism Of The Bible: Its History, Methods &
Results (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2006).
Appendix B: Basic Bible Study Materials — A
Suggested Bibliography (with links to Amazon)
This is the book
that I recommend as collateral reading for the "Scripture Study
Seminar":
1. In addition to Sinclair Ferguson's work
that I am recommending as collateral reading the following five recent works on
the subject may be the most helpful:
J. Scott Duvall, and J.
Daniel Hays, Journey into God's Word: Your Guide to
Understanding and Applying the Bible (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 2008);
Gordon D. Fee and
Douglas Stuart, How To Read The Bible For All Its Worth: A Guide to
Understanding the Bible, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids: Academie Books, 1982,
1993, 2003, 2014);
Peter Krol, Knowable Word: Helping
Ordinary People Learn to Study the Bible (Minneapolis: Cruciform Press,
2014);
Grant Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive
Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1991, 2006);
R.
C. Sproul, Knowing Scripture,
2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977, 2009);
2. Here are five recommended older works whose
value does not fade!
James M. Gray, How to Master the English Bible: An Experience, a
Method, a Result, an Illustration (London: Oliphant Anderson &
Ferrier, 1907);
J. Edwin Hartill, Principles of Biblical Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1947);
print editions available on Amazon at
[accessed 18 JAN 2015].
Arthur T. Pierson, The Bible and Spiritual Criticism: Being the
Second Series of Exeter Hall Lectures on the Bible Delivered in London,
England in the Months of February, March
and April, 1904 (Minneapolis:
Bethany Fellowship, Inc., n.d.; 1970 reprint of 1905 original by The Baker and
Taylor Co., New York);
Robert A. Traina, Methodical Bible
Study: A New Approach to Hermeneutics (Wilmore, KY: self-published, 1952; Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1980);
Oletta Wald, The New Joy of Discovery in Bible Study,
rev. ed. (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2002);
Note: This newly revised edition is
also available in Kindle.
Compiled by:
John T. “Jack” Jeffery
Pastor, Wayside Gospel
Chapel
Greentown, PA
Robert L. Plummer, 40 Questions about Interpreting the Bible,
series ed. Benjamin L. Merkle (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic &
Professional, 2011), pg. 72, s.v.
“Figure 8: Translation Approaches of Major Bible Versions.”
We will only be
considering this in the 15 NT occurrences, but a similar situation is
encountered in the 9 OT references where there is no more basis in the Hebrew
for the English phrase resorted to as a dynamic equivalent in the King James
Version than there is in the Greek of the New Testament passages: Gen. 44:7; 44:17; Josh. 22:29; 24:16;
1 Sam. 12:23; 14:45; 20:2; 1Chr. 11:19; and Job 27:5. The Strong’s Concordance
numbering for this phrase under the entry for “God” is “3361, 1096,” rather
than the normal “2316.”
John H. Skilton, “The Transmission of the
Scriptures,” in The Infallible Word,
eds. N. B. Stonehouse and Paul Woolley (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1946), pp. 148, 153-165.
See excerpt below cited by Louis McBride.
RE: Dave Brunn, One
Bible, Many Versions: Are All Translations Created Equal? (Downers Grove,
IL: IVP Academic, 2013).
