Monthly Archives: August 2010

Tonight, I had the fortune of spending the evening with John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.  Though not a Calvinist myself, I did stumble across a couple of sentences that would horrify most of today's Calvinists.  Allow me to quote him:

1. THE human mind, when it hears this doctrine [referring to the Doctrine of Reprobation], cannot restrain its petulance, but boils and rages as if aroused by the sound of a trumpet. Many professing a desire to defend the Deity from an invidious charge admit the doctrine of election, but deny that any one is reprobated (Bernard. in Die Ascensionis, Serm. 2). This they do ignorantly and childishly since there could be no election without its opposite reprobation.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, Chapter xxiii, Section 1. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

Did you get what Calvin stated?  If not, go back and read it again.  

The Doctrine of Reprobation is the belief that not only does God chooses who goes to Heaven, but God also chooses those who will go to Hell.  He goes on to say that you cannot have the Doctrine of Election without the belief in Reprobation.

Most Calvinists today are against the idea that God chooses people to go to Hell.  They will claim that while God does in fact choose the elect for salvation, He then allows the rest to continue on their inevitable journey to destruction.  They go so far as to ostracize any Calvinist who does hold to the Doctrine of Reprobation, calling them Hyper-Calvinists.

According to John Calvin himself, anyone who denies the Doctrine of Reprobation is an ignorant child, and is not a true Calvinist.

My response?  I laugh at the heresy of Calvinism and weep over all the damage and destruction these individuals cause.  God be merciful to those who would don the mantle of Calvin and reject God's Word.  

Lord, open their eyes to the heresy they hold to!

"Good, better, best; never let it rest; until your good gets better, and your better gets best!"  

So many pseudo-Bible Scholars love to look at the mustard seed (ref. to Matt. 13:31-32) and tout that the Bible is wrong, because the seed is not the smallest.  While the mustard seed is approximately 1/20th of an inch in size, with the smaller petunia seed about 1/50th of an inch and the yet smaller begonia some 1/100th of an inch in scale.  Even yet the smaller orchid seeds are so tiny that a 10x to 30x microscope is required for the eye to see it in any detail. Furthermore, the microscopic spores of mushrooms, lichens, and molds, which also are seeds, are so tiny and lightweight that even the slightest currents of air may carry them vast distances. These too are seeds for the word spore itself means "seed." Therefore the mustard seed is technically not the smallest seed of all. The objection has been pressed even further to say something like, "Since the mustard seed isn't the smallest of all seeds then Jesus was wrong, and if Jesus was God and made everything, He should have known that the mustard seed is not the smallest seed!

The sad part is NO God fearing Bible Scholar has ever called them to the carpet!  Why… WHY… doesn't anyone look at the Greek?!?  The word MIKROTERON (translated small, less in verse 32) is a Comparative, NOT a Superlative.  Don't believe me?  Look it up.  I double-dutch dare you.

Allow me to give you a quick lesson on adjectives.  Adjectives are used to describe nouns.  An example is, "This is a SMALL seed."  But then you have a next level of adjectives, called Comparatives.  While an adjective would be used by saying, "this is a small seed,"  a comparative would state, "this is a smaller seed."  It is an adjective that is used to compare, hence the name: Comparative.  But then we have the next step, which is called a Superlative.  Superlatives include, but are not limited to highest, greatest, grandest, etc., etc., etc. So, if we used a superlative in this sentence, it would state, "this is the smallest seed."  Understand?

The accurate translation for verse 32 is, "Which indeed is the LESSER of all the seeds….".  

Now, ask yourself the question, why is our Lord and Savior using a comparative instead of a superlative?  Why?  You cannot argue with the Greek as you sometimes can with the English.  This adjective is a comparative and not a superlative.  So, again I ask, why is God's Word using a comparative and not a superlative.  The answer is simple, and comes in two parts.  

1.)  Christ, being Creator, knows that the Mustard seed is not the absolute smallest seed.  If the Bible was in fact stating that the mustard seed was the smallest, it would not use the comparative MIKROTERON, but the true superlative: ELAXISTOS (which btw, means smallest, least).  Yet it does not!  

2.)  He is also not using this parable to teach science, but to teach a moral.  What seed is so small as a mustard seed, yet grows to be so huge?  A petunia?  No.  A mushroom?  Nope.  It's the mustard seed.

Let God be true, and every man a liar…. – Romans 3:4

Ever since I started my Bible degree ('89), I always had a fascination with electronic books, especially Bible software and electronic texts.  Over the years I have always maintained the latest and greatest Bible programs, including e-Sword, TheWord, Logos, and BibleWorks.  All of these are great, but none of them provided many early Greek texts that I wanted.  Sure, they were eager to give you the Nestle-Aaland Critical Text, and even willing to provide Scrivener's Greek Text, but not Erasmus's New Testament in Greek and Latin.

For years I had scoured the Internet for a copy to no avail.  Once, in 2006, Ink and Blood English Bible Exhibit came to Idaho Falls and I had a chance to gaze upon a copy of Erasmus's text, but even think about touching it made the security guards nervous.  After dialoguing with several software providers, I almost gave up hope of even obtaining even a glance at the text.

Until now…

Last week, I ran across Bibles.org.uk.  It provided a list of free Bible texts, sadly of which were not in a pdf format but in DejaVue format.  I wasn't too excited about this, but I was curious about their online store.  Thinking that I was too poor to buy anything, I thought i was safe.  I was wrong.  The link directed me to Lulu.com's Bible Storefront.  There I found many interesting an wonderful pdf sources for Greek texts, but the most fantastic find was Erasmus's 1522 3rd Edition Greek-Latin New Testament.

Needless to say, I was not hesitant to grab a copy.  For less than $15.00 I had fulfilled a 20 year old quest.

{Our church has a Reformer's Unanimous (aka RUI) program.  Though it originally geared for substance abusers, RUI also is great for Christian growth and development.  While going through this program, we are asked to do several challenges: memorizing Scripture, journaling, and writing reports.  Where i am at right now, I am asked to write a small essay on what Romans 6 means to the believer.  Though the requirement only asks for 100 words, I just wrote what came to my mind in as short an essay as possible.  And here it is.}

Romans 6 is a vital key for the believer in relation to his Christian walk.

For years, Logos software has been the pinnacle tool for all serious Bible students, teachers, pastors, and scholars.  It is a robust tool that allows you to search through your entire library and like any good tool, it allows you to increase your speed and quality of work.

Last November, Logos came out with Version 4.  Being a much more powerful tool than Logos 3, people were quick to grab it up.  The problem was, Logos 4 didn't work on the Mac computers.

Until Now.

On October 1st, Logos 4 will be coming out for the Apple Macintosh computers.  As with the PC version, it will provide some really serious tools.

Stop by Logos and check it out for yourself.  It's well worth the investment.

Logos Bible Software is giving away thousands of dollars of prizes to celebrate the launch of Logos Bible Software 4 Mac on October 1. Prizes include an iMac, a MacBook Pro, an iPad, an iPod Touch, and more than 100 other prizes!

They’re also having a special limited-time sale on their Mac and PC base packages and upgrades. Check it out!

Several days ago, I joined another Christian forum.  In my introductions, I had stated that even though I personally consider the Authorized King James Version to be the superior English translation, this does not make me a KJV-Only adherent. I concluded by claiming to be a TR-Only person, holding to the conviction that the Received Text is superior over the liberal's Critical Text.

An immediate sharp reply came in the form of the query, "Which Textus Receptus do you hold to?"

Now, I have danced with enough scorners and pseudo-Bible Scholars enough to know, that they really are not interested in my answer, but only to show their intellectual prowess. Yet, setting their motivations aside, it really is a good question.

Allow me to explain:
1. Today's copy of the Textus Receptus (which is published by the Trinitarian Bible Society) is actually Scrivner's Text (circa. 1881 and 1894). At first, he along with many of his colleagues were duped by Westcott and Hort until he realized the true impact of their heresy. Though it is claimed that Scrivner "reverse-engineered" his Greek Text from the King James, he did more than this in a different direction, of which I will explain later.

2. Before Scrivner's Text we then have Beza's Greek Text of 1565. Beza was Calvin's successor, and was a popular Reformed Scholar of his time.

3. Going back further, we have Stephanus Greek Text of 1550. This was compiled by Robert I Estienne, who was also known as Robertus Stephanus in Latin.

4. The predecessor to Estienne was Desiderius Erasmus himself. Erasmus was commissioned by the pope to recompile the Latin Vulgate. Yet, he thought best to also include in his text the original Greek text. He had the impression that scholars in different countries, speaking different languages would receive better profit from the original text than from a Latin translation of the Greek. This work began in 1512, and was printed in 1522. This is where the title Textus Receptus came from, which is Latin for "Received Text".

Erasmus took the overwhelming collection of Byzantine Manuscripts as his source (and possibly referred to the Complutensian Polyglot <who knows?> which also came from the same manuscripts). Approximately 50 to 60 years earlier, the Byzantine Empire fell to the Muslims, which caused a massive exodus of the Eastern Empire to the West, bringing with it the Greek texts, and fresh ideas of the culture, which I personally believe ignited the Renaissance Period. With the deterioration of these manuscripts Erasmus thought it wise to compile them together which gave birth to the TR.

The Complutensian Polyglot came several years earlier, and did not officially bear the title Textus Receptus, but is useful in textual criticism.

————————————————————————-
Summation:
So you see where this individual is coming from. As a scholar I firmly hold to not only the doctrine of Plenary Verbal Inspiration of God's Word, but I also strongly believe that God dynamically and personally preserved His Word through time. This "skeptic", in an attempt to derail me, tosses the question (of which I will expand), "Which Textus Receptus do you believe is 'pure' since there are a handful of Received Texts through time?"

My answer to him is, "yes, all of them."
————————————————————————-



Now, before I allow this scorner to jump up and shout "ah-ha!" allow me to steal his thunder. Between Erasmus and Scrivner, there are words that differ, If you open up a Critical text and TR side-by-side, you will notice variants. Words are spelled differently, and some add to, and some take away whole phrases. This is the same between the TRs, BUT TO A MUCH LESSER DEGREE.

The biggest gripe the liberal scholars hear, coming out of the TR Camp is that the Critical Text (aka Westcott-Hort Text, Nestle-Aaland Text, UBS Text) and the Textus Receptus has too many differences. They chortle over the fact that the varying TRs also contain differences. What they don't tell you is that these differences are far less significant than found in the inferior texts of the codices Siniaticus and Vaticanus.  While the difference between the Critical Text is several thousand, the differences between the various recognized texts which have been referred to as "Textus Recpetus" is just a scant handful.  And these variances can be quickly identified and make no impact on interpretation.

I'll give you one such example, and it is found in Luke 2:22. In the TR as a whole, the phrase we need to focus on is, "…the days of her purification…." In the Stephanus Text, he uses the feminine plural pronoun, which reads in English, "…the days of their purification…." Between the TR and the Critical Text, this is a minor variance, but it is significant to those who believe that God preserved His Word! But let's take a look at it.

In the computer networking world, there is a term called CRC-Check Sums. A checksum is usually a bit or two of data, attached to a larger data packet which is a key sort of. When a data packet comes in, the receiving computer tally's up all the data in a number and compares it to the check sum. If they agree, then the data is accepted. If they do NOT agree, the receiving computer requests that the data packet gets resent. This retains the integrity of the data traveling across the Internet.

The Bible does the same thing! <w00t to all you Christian geeks out there!>

If you've been in a Bible-Believing church long enough, you will hear a preacher say, "The very best commentary for the Bible, is the Bible itself!" This is a true saying.

Now, Luke 2:22 is referring to an Old Testament Ceremonial Law, which is found in Leviticus 12. In Lev. 12:1-4, it talks about how a woman who has just given birth is ceremonially unclean. She needs to wait 8 days, then her son is circumcised, and she can bring an offering to the temple (or tabernacle). Yet, look at verse 4, "…until the days of her purifying be fulfilled."

So, which pronoun should be used? That's a no-brainer: "her."

Also is the fact that while all of these texts have been dubbed, "Textus Receptus", the ones who bear the most variants have never been used to translate another Bible, ergo, not truly being a Received Text.

Once again, the scorners, and godless are quick to jump up and proclaim, "That is only evidence of the Lucian Recension!"

I now have to pose the question, "who taught you about Lucian of Antioch and the Lucian Recension?"

The source of this lie stems from none other than the liberal theologians themselves! There never was a Lucian of Antioch. There never was a Lucian Recension! It was made up to give a false-credence to the Westcott and Hort Text. It was conjured up by those who refuse to see God's protective hand and Satan's diabolical plans to corrupt the text. Rather, they want to impress each other by their massive intellect. They love to be patted on the backs by their godless peers, rather than seek after God's approval.

But what about the accusation that Scrivner doctored his text to crow-bar it to the King James? Who told you he did that? Ah… the liberal theologians.

The translators of the Authorized Version didn't just pull their translation out of thin air, as the godless would like you to believe. Neither did Scrivner hap-hazardly concoct a new Greek Text from the King James Bible.

The whole point of standing for the Textus Receptus over the Critical Text is that God promised to preserve His Word.  Do you cling to men who cannot help but mock and ridicule God's Word, or will you believe the Bible:

Psalms 12:6-7
6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Psalms 119:89
89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
Isaiah 40:8
8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Matthew 5:18
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
1 Peter 1:23-25
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

The text itself apart from God's Holy Spirit is just a book.  But it's what we do with this book, and the influence of God's Holy Spirit is what the true value is.

Who do you believe?

The choice is yours.

It's now 4:10PM on a Wednesday.  I have 25 minutes to kill, before I need to toddle off and begin my routines for tonight's class.  Since there isn't a whole lot that can be done in 25 minutes, I figured that I could best use it to toss off a quick note and let you folk know about a free web site I had found the other day.

This site is called Bible Study Tools, So far as I have seen, it's a free online service providing quick access to general study tools, including Bible translations, dictionaries, and encyclopedias.  Though most of us already have either e-Sword, or TheWord loaded up on our main computers, there are times when we are visiting a friend's house, or working on another workstation, that a quick and easy service like this is extremely useful.

When you get an opportunity, stop by the site and check out what's available, in order to see if it could meet your needs.

This is Part 2 of a multi-part series answering the accusation by New Evangelicals that Fundamentalists are too battle-thirsty.  In the first part, the Fundamentalist is confronted by the accusation that we are constantly battle-thirsty.  We opened God's Word and showed where the child of God is called to be a soldier of Christ.  We are commanded to put on the whole armor of God and the fight the good fight of faith.  The next issue that needs to be addressed is that the Christian who is living for Christ will be hated by the world.  

Jesus Himself warned us of this danger:

Galatians 6:7-8

7  Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

8  For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Revelation 20:11-15

11  And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

12  And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

13  And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

14  And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

15  And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Today, Anonymous asked me a question on my Tumblr Account.  He writes,

Okay, if we're asking anything…when Jesus said that he came not to destroy the law nut to fulfill it…does he mean that it was fulfilled as in 'complete' like a race is completed and thus 'over'; or maybe 'made perfect' as in a painting…or what?

A lot of people hear that the Law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ, but they don't always understand what this means.  What is the purpose of the Law?  Why have it now, if it is fulfilled?  If we are under grace, why do we still have the Law in our Bibles?

These are good questions.  Let's take a look and see what the Scriptures have to say.

#1.  It Reveals That We are Sinners.  

Paul writes:

Romans 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. 

Romans 5:12-20 shows that while sin was in the world after the fall of Adam, this sin was not imputed to man until the Law came (Rom. 5:13).  Though there was death (because of sin), there was nothing written down as to what sin really was until the Law.

So, the Law was not given to man in order to be saved, because no man (apart from Christ) could keep the law 100%.

Now that Christ died on the cross and paid for our sins, we are no longer under the Law, but under grace: 

Romans 6:14-15

For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

#2.  The Law Ultimately Brings Us to Jesus Christ

Galatians 3:19-29 reads

 19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. 

 20 Now a mediator is not [a mediator] of one, but God is one. 

 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. 

 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. 

 23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 

 24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 

 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. 

 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 

 27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 

 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 

 29 And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. 

 You see, Jesus Christ came to save not the righteous, but sinners (Matt. 9:13; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:32).  An individual doesn't know that they need to be saved, until they first realized that they are lost.  The Law reveals that man is guilty before God, and stands condemned.  Only then can a person realize they need a savior and that the only one who can save them is Jesus Christ (John 14:6).

 So, with what the Bible teaches us, the Law was never abolished, but is rather fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

 Hope this helps.

Last week, I posted a quick somewhat humorous comment on How New Evangelicals View a Fundamentalist.  I pointed out that many outside the Fundamentalist camp have a propensity to view us as "battle-thirsty Vikings.  If you will allow me, I would like to address this issue carefully and lovingly.  

First off, in order to properly address this issue, we need to go back to Scripture.  The Bible always has been a solid foundation for providing a secure footing.

1 Timothy 1:18

18  This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;

1 Timothy 6:12

12  Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.

2 Timothy 2:3-4

3  Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

4  No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

Ephesians 6:10-18

10  Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.

11  Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.

12  For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

13  Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

14  Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;

15  And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;

16  Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.

17  And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

18  Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;