A Paper Examining:
Logical Criticisms of
Textual Criticism
(By Gordon H. Clark)
In partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Bible
Historic
Dr. Gary E. La More, President
A rescript and critical analysis by: Hugo W.K. Schönhaar
Pastor of
www.torontobaptist.org
Logical
Criticisms of Textual Criticism
By Gordon H. Clark
(A rescript and critical analysis by: Hugo W.K. Schönhaar, Pastor of Toronto Baptist Church)
Foreword:
John Robbins contends that Christians have been kept in the dark regarding the defective scholarship and textual basis of the modern versions. The scholars have not done a scholarly job in their translation work.
Robbins challenges believers to go to church and compare the modern versions that are read from the pulpit with a KJV or a NKJV (?). The reader will be surprised to find a host of serious changes.
Robbins instructs the reader to take a copy of this book to their pastor or teacher, to be gentle and to challenge them to read it. Robbins’s hope is that if enough good books on this issue are given out that perhaps even seminary professors will see the light.
Introduction:
Chapter One: Examples
from the Old Testament
This chapter gives several verse comparisons that are not necessary:
Psalm 3:1,
Lord, how are they increased that trouble
me! many are they that rise up against me.
RSV, O LORD, how many are
my foes! Many are rising against me;[1]
NASV, …adversaries…
The RSV omits the verb. These versions have not replaced an obsolete word or replaced a hard word for an easier one.
Psalm 91:4,
He shall cover thee with his feathers,
and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.
RSV, he will cover you with his pinions,[2]
NASV, …pinions…
The new word, supplied in these versions is less familiar to modern Americans than feathers.
Isaiah 53:1,
Who hath believed our report?
RSV,
Who has believed what we have heard?
NASV,
…our
message…
The
author contends that new translations are possible but that the NASV is
redundant and unnecessary in that both report
and message are common English words.
The RSV changes the text by focusing on what Isaiah heard instead of what he actually preached.
Chapter
Two: New Testament Examples
Matthew
5:18,
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.
RSV,
For truly, I say to you, till heaven and
earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until
all is accomplished. [3]
…not a letter not a stroke…
NIV,
…not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen…
The truth of the matter, concerning the Septuagint is that it is the work of Origen and can be found in the fifth column of his Hexapla[4]. Gary C. Webb clears up any ambiguity nicely:
“However, in Matthew
Luke 1:1,
Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set
forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed
among us,
RSV,
Inasmuch as many have
undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished
among us, [6]
The author to Theophilus: Many writers have undertaken to draw up an account of the events that have happened among us.
John 14:18,
I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Acts
When
they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him
with their teeth.
Why
Romans 4:3,
For what saith the scripture? Abraham
believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
elogisqh is
translated counted in this verse but
in verse four it is translated reckoned.
Ephes.
Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may
be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. [14] Stand therefore,
having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate
of righteousness;
“Perhaps someone can argue
that loins and wiles are archaic.” Has
Hebrews 1:1,
God, who at sundry times and in divers
manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Hebrews 1:5,
For unto which of the angels said he at any
time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to
him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Hebrews 2:3,
How shall we escape, if we neglect so great
salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed
unto us by them that heard him;
Hebrews 2:10,
For it became him, for whom are all things,
and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the
captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
While generally preferring the KJB on these points,
Hebrews 11:11,
Through faith also Sara herself
received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was
past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.
NIV,
By faith Abraham…
Chapter Three: Logical
and Textual Criticism
He comments on the 3,000 changes in the Gospels. He lists the vast evidence available for the New Testament: manuscripts, versions, fathers et al. He stresses the importance of knowing something of the sources for the versions that are available today.
Chapter Four: The Greek
Text
Chapter Five: Variant
Mark
And he left the linen cloth, and fled
from them naked.
NRSV,
but he
left the linen cloth and ran off naked.
The majority of manuscripts read as the King James
Bible does.
2 Cor. 11:32,
In
RSV,
At
These two examples are minor
variations but others are far more substantial. The King James Bible represents
the vast majority of Greek readings in the English language. The critics use a method that discounts much
of the evidence by counting hundreds of manuscripts as only one witness.
By the same twisted logic, a lone manuscript, with no other copies to support
it, is given equal, or even greater
weight than the hundreds of Byzantine readings!
The logic is flawed as the
reason for 20 or 40 copies is due to the fact that a large number of scribes
thought the text they were copying from was faithful to the autographs. If only
one copy survives, as with B (Vaticanus), it is evident, from its lack of
progeny, to have been deemed of little value.
There has been little progress, over the years, to properly put manuscripts into families. Sometimes this work has resulted in questionable conclusions.
One theory is that a hard, complicated reading is to be preferred over a more simple reading. There is no evidence that a scribe intentionally altered the text to simplify it but it is more likely he complicated a text unintentionally either from fatigue or mispronunciation of the reader.
Similarly, it is assumed a longer reading is suspect while a shorter is to be preferred. It would seem untenable that a devout scribe, with the text at his finger tips would ignore the Bible and God’s express warning:
Rev. 22:18-19,
For I testify unto every man that heareth
the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things,
God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: [19] And if
any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall
take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from
the things which are written in this book.
Chapter Six: Mathew
Matthew 1:16,
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary,
of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Cf.
RSV,
and Jacob
the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called
Christ.
Matthew 7:13,
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is
the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be
which go in thereat:
All Greek texts support this reading. Even א supports this reading in a very interesting way. The first scribes hand omits it but the second hand corrects the omission[7]!
Matthew 8:12,
But the children of the kingdom shall be
cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Only two manuscripts support a different reading from the TR but Aland gives the TR a C rating. The King James Bible is supported by 25 witnesses!
Matthew 9:4,
And Jesus knowing their thoughts
said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
Textus Receptus,
kai idwn o ihsouV taV enqumhseiV
autwn eipen ina ti umeis enqumeisqe ponhra en taiV kardiaiV umwn
Basically the argument goes that since knowing makes more sense than seeing
(found in some MS), seeing must
have been a correction of knowing! (Since
God does not make sense.) That kind of reasoning is only fit for the outhouse! Even
after all their mental gymnastics are exhausted, the TR reading is retained in
their Greek text! These folks are not even honest in their aberrant scholarship!
Matthew 18:7,
Woe unto the world because of offences! for
it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence
cometh!
Textus Receptus,
ouai tw kosmw apo twn skandalwn anagkh gar estin elqein ta skandala plhn ouai tw anqrwpw ekeinw di ou to skandalon ercetai
(tw anqrwpw ekeinw = that man)
Alexandrian,
ouai tw kosmw apo twn skandalwn anagkh
gar elqein ta skandala plhn ouai tw anqrwpw di ou to skandalon ercetai
(tw anqrwpw = the man)
The bottom line is that the majority of MS have the TR reading. Even א and B cannot agree! Matthew 26:60c, At the last came two false witnesses.
Metzger’s logic is found to be bad.
Matthew 21:44,
And
whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall
fall, it will grind him to powder.
All but two manuscripts omit this verse. Aland calls it an interpolation but his darlings, א and B, have it!
Matthew 24:6,
And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of
wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but
the end is not yet.
Matthew 28:9,
And as they went to tell his disciples,
behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the
feet, and worshipped him.
NAS,
And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. (margin: “saying hello”)
Metzger suggests the reason
for the shorter reading may be due to a homoeoteleuton (the copyists reads a
phrase from a MS, looks away and looks to a similar word and writes from that
point on, thus omitting part of the original) –so why a B rating? There is no
proof for this but since א
and B agree they go with it.
Chapter Seven: Mark
Mark 1:1,
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus
Christ, the Son of God;
The bone of contention here is Son of God. Aland gives it a C rating. The NASV exaggerates the truth by stating, “many MSS omit the Son of God.” There are two MSS that omit it: the first hand of א and Θ. Modern textual theory is largely based on theory and conjecture.
Mark
And he healed many that were sick of divers
diseases, and cast out many devils; and suffered not the devils to speak,
because they knew him.
TR, kai
eqerapeusen pollouV kakwV econtaV poikilaiV nosoiV kai daimonia polla exebalen
kai ouk hfien lalein ta daimonia oti hdeisan auton
What is in question here is the longer ending of a few manuscripts: to be the Christ. The TR has the correct, shorter reading as does the King James Bible.
Mark
And Jesus, moved with compassion, put forth
his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou clean.
Was Jesus moved with
compassion or was he enraged as only one MS has it (D). The idea of a change in
content here is laughable based on such shoddy evidence but
Mark 5:1,
And they came over unto the other side of
the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes.
The only Greek MSS that do
not have Gadarenes are א and
B, which read; Gerasenes.
To change the KJB would only be based on speculation and not evidence.
Mark
Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me
and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also
shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with
the holy angels.
The underlined words in Mark 8:38 have a strong basis for
authenticity.
Chapter Eight: Luke
Luke 9:59,
And he said unto another, Follow me. But he
said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
Only based on a prejudice in favour of B is the word Lord questioned. There is no serious textual evidence to support the omission of Lord.
Luke 10:15,
And thou,
The critics speak out of both sides of their mouths. Metzger says they were impressed to adopt the shorter verb for the Greek text but the English text has the longer verb –confusion.
Luke 11:2,
And he said unto them, When ye pray, say,
Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy
will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.
NAS,
Father, hallowed…
P75, א and B support the shorter reading. The differences found in the
modern version as compared with the KJB are mainly due to א and
B.
Luke 13:27,
But he shall say, I tell you, I know
you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
A peculiar Hebrew construction in the Greek text! However, not at all uncommon. Only five MSS omit this phrase and over two dozen retain it.
Luke 16:14,
And the Pharisees also, who were covetous,
heard all these things: and they derided him.
No textual problem: just two or three variants that have little support.
Luke 16:21,
And desiring to be fed with the crumbs
which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his
sores.
Only four MSS omit this word. Metzger guesses that it was added to sound more poetic.
Luke 19:25,
(And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten
pounds.)
Five MSS omit this verse but all the rest retain it including א and B! The problem is these apostates get a little suspicious when even א and B agree with the Byzantine text.
Luke 21:36,
Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that
ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to
pass, and to stand before the Son of man.
The majority of evidence reads as the KJB. Theologically have strength does not fit.
Luke 24:3,
And they entered in, and found not the body
of the Lord Jesus.
“Liturgical addition” is cited as the reason for Lord being “added” to the text. The fact
is, almost all (except three [two from the 12th century!]) MSS have Lord. This is not scholarship but
outright deception void of theological honesty or intellectual rigor.
Luke 24:9,
And returned from the sepulchre, and
told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.
This reading is only given a D rating. Only D omits these words.
Enough said.
Luke 24:12,
Then arose Peter, and ran unto the
sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves,
and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.
This reading is only given a D rating. Only D omits these words. Enough said.
Chapter Nine: John
John
And every man went unto his own house.
[8:1] Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
[2] And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people
came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. [3] And the scribes and
Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her
in the midst, [4] They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery,
in the very act. [5] Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be
stoned: but what sayest thou? [6] This they said, tempting him, that they might
have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the
ground, as though he heard them not. [7] So when they continued asking him, he
lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let
him first cast a stone at her. [8] And again he stooped down, and wrote on the
ground. [9] And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience,
went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was
left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. [10] When Jesus had lifted up
himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those
thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? [11] She said, No man, Lord. And
Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
This is possibly the gnarliest bone of contention found in the
sacred Book -of the lot! Sadly,
The RSV has, 8 The king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter
of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons
of Merab the daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adri-el the son of
Barzillai the Meholathite;[10] thus adding a name not found in the Hebrew text!
These good, godly apostates can’t read plain English or they do not bother to study. When in doubt, throw the scholars out (in Christian love of course!) and take a stand for the Book of Books!
Here is Talmage Spence writing on the Cardinal’s perversion:
The Change From Kings to Popes[11]
…the New Testament would come by kings even into the early days of the
use of the printing press. It would not be long, however, before bishops,
cardinals, and popes in Roman Catholicism would use kings as an instrument to
gain glory for themselves. As an example, in the early days of the printing
press, Francisco Ximenes de Cisneras, Cardinal Archbishop of
Here is a clue as to the theological bent of this Cardinal:[13]
|
The First Printed Original Language Bible |
|
|
|
From Ximenes, Cardinal Francisco de Cisneros. Dedicatory
Prologue to the Complutensian Polyglot Bible. As reproduced in Catholic
Reform: From Cardinal Ximenes to the Council of Trent, 1495-1563, trans.
John C. Olin, ed. John C. Olin (New York: Fordham University
Press, 1990), 61-64. |
|
|
|
To Our most Holy and Most Clement Lord, Leo X, PROLOGUE There are many reasons, Holy Father, that impel us to print the
languages of the original text of Holy Scripture.[14]
|
Notice how the Pope is
referred to as Lord, Reverend and Holy Father (all these titles are reserved
for God alone) –and
Ephes. 4:5,
One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Psalm 111:9,
He sent redemption unto his people: he hath
commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name.
John 17:11,
And now I am no more in the world, but
these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through
thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
Next,
This leads us to the so-called "promise" of Erasmus.
Westcott and Hort advocate Bruce Metzger made this claim, which became the
popular argument against the Johannine Comma. He wrote, "Erasmus promised
that he would insert the Comma Johanneum, as it is called, in future
editions if a single Greek manuscript could be found that contained the
passage. At length such a copy was found—or made to order." This view
against the authenticity of 1 John 5:7f is parroted by many even today.
Is this what truly happened? H. J. de Jonge of the faculty of theology,
Almost as
many manuscripts retain John
The style of John
Chapter Ten: Acts
Acts
After this man rose up Judas of
The vast majority of MS include the word all but Metzger gives it a C rating, in spite of the fact that א and B have it! Only P45 and D omit the word.
Acts
And Philip said, If thou believest with all
thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ
is the Son of God.
Chapter Eleven: Romans
Romans 1:7,
To all that be in Rome, beloved of
God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the
Lord Jesus Christ.
Only one manuscript omits
this phrase but it still comes out with a B rating.
Romans 5:1,
Therefore being justified by faith, we have
peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: