The 30 Best Arguments Against King James Onlyism*

Good morning, All.

I know the blog has been pretty quiet as of late. Both Dr.’s Van Kleeck have been working to publish books. I am happy to say that they are now available on Amazon. I will let Dr. Van Kleeck Sr. plug his book when he is ready. The main reason for this post was to thank all those who have purchased The 30 Best Arguments Against King James Onlyism*. Just this week, it has shot up as the #1 New Release in the Religious Fundamentalism category.

In short, 30 Arguments sets out to answer the best or most prevailing 30 or so arguments against the Textus Receptus and/or King James Version position. I believe it is a short and approachable work that tries to get at the heart of our opponent’s objections while providing an answer suited to the objection.

If you have any questions, please let us know.

Thanks again.

You can find the book here.

One Lord. One Faith. One Bible?

“There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

Ephesians 4:4-6

John Calvin writes in his commentary on the above passage from Ephesians, “Some consider the unity of the Spirit to mean that spiritual unity which is produced in us by the Spirit of God. There can be no doubt that He alone makes us “of one accord, of one mind,” (Philippians 2:2,) and thus makes us one; but I think it more natural to understand the words as denoting harmony of views.”

It seems fair that we have a harmony of view regarding Christ as Head, the Christian calling, Christ as Lord, and God as Father. The Cross is exclusive in its efficacious work. There is only one way to salvation. There is only one true faith.

Calvin goes on to write regarding verse 4, “that we are subject to a law which no more permits the children of God to differ among themselves than the kingdom of heaven to be divided.” And what exactly does this look like? Recall the words of Jesus as he taught the disciples to pray, “thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” Unity on earth mirrors unity in heaven in one particular way. We must be united in the will of God, and that it be done.

For the cessationist, what is the revealed will of God on earth in the present church age? The word of God, Scripture, is that revealed will. In commenting on verse 5, Calvin observes that “Christ cannot be divided. Faith cannot be rent. There are not various baptisms, but one which is common to all. God cannot cease to be one, and unchangeable.” We are no more permitted to differ over what words are God’s words than the kingdom of heaven is to differ over which words are God’s words.

Where do we learn that there is one Lord, Christ? The Bible. Where do we learn that there is one faith? The Bible. Where do we receive faith? By hearing the Bible. Where do we learn that there is one God? The Bible. Where do we learn this one God is Father to the Christian? The Bible. Where do we learn of the one Holy Spirit? The Bible. Where do we learn from this one Holy Spirit? The Bible. Yet the epistemological source, the ground and foundation of where we learn all these “ones” is not one. The English-speaking believing community does not have one God’s word from the one Spirit to learn of the one God, the one Spirit, the one faith, the one Lord.

We here at StandardSacredText.com concur with Calvin in confessing that “Christ cannot be divided. Faith cannot be rent. There are not various baptisms, but one which is common to all. God cannot cease to be one, and unchangeable.” And as such, there cannot be various God’s words, but one which is common to all. God’s word cannot cease to be one and unchangeable because it is the very reflection of God and His will to the New Testament Church.

Apographa

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is essential-vocab-1.png

“copies of an original;

specifically, the scribal copies of the original autographa (q.v.) of Scripture.”Richard Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology, Term: apographa.

The term apographa deserves close attention in that the documents were not merely understood to be copies of copies of copies. Still, for the Protestant Scholastics and for us here at StandardSacredText.com the apographa are in one sense the copies of the original autographa. Muller observes under the same entry,

“The Protestant scholastics distinguished between the absolute infallibility of the original copies of the biblical books and the textual imperfection of the apographa.”

Muller, Dictionary, apographa.

For the Protestant scholastics, there were two kinds of “copies.” First, there were the copies that made up the sacred text of God’s people, from which the Protestant scholastics did battle with Roman Catholic apologists. Second, the apographa as “manuscript tradition”, which though essentially correct, did possess imperfections which Protestant scholastics thought easily remedied through “their exegetical method intended, by means of mastery of the languages and the comparative study of the extant texts, to overcome errors caused by transmission.”

“In addition, the Protestant orthodox held, as a matter of doctrinal conviction stated in the locus de Scriptura Sacra of their theological systems, the providential preservation of the text throughout history.”

Muller, Dictionary, apographa.

This “matter of doctrinal conviction” is born out quite clearly in the declaration of the Westminster Confession of Faith 1.8:

“The Old Testament in Hebrew…and the New Testament in Greek…being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical.”

Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.8.

In short, first, the historic Protestant orthodox position on this point was to hold that the original text they held to as the sacred text, which was a copy, was equal to the autographa. Second, the textual tradition [i.e., the apographa] did indeed possess corruptions, but these corruptions could be easily overcome through “their exegetical method intended…to overcome errors caused by the transmission of the text.”

What is Standard Sacred Text.com – Text

Before addressing a topic so fundamental as the doctrine of God, Francis Turretin begins his Institutes of Elenctic Theology with a discussion on the doctrine of Scripture. Turretin is writing in the third wave of the Reformation and the struggle over the certainty and authority of the Scriptures was still a hotly contested locus between the Protestants and Catholics

In his second topic and second question, Turretin asks,

“Was it necessary for the word of God to be committed to writing? We affirm.”

Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Vol. 1, Second Topic, Q. 2.

He goes on to remark on the three things that prove said necessity: “1.) the preservation of the word; 2.) its vindication; 3.) its propagation.” Turretin offers a summary of these three when he writes,

“It was necessary for a written word to be given to the church that the canon of true religious faith might be constant and unmoved; that it might easily be preserved pure and entire against the weakness of memory, the depravity of men, and the shortness of life; that it might be more certainly defended from the frauds and corruptions of Satan.”

Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Vol. 1, Second Topic, Q. 2, Sec. VI.

Note the timely and relevant language here. Turretin, writing in 1696, acknowledges the weakness of memory which is an Achille’s Heal of mere oral tradition, the depravity of men to alter the word of God, the brevity of human life, and finally Satan himself as corruptors of the Scriptural text. For Turretin and the Reformers in general, the textual issues is at the bottom a moral, generational, and spiritual one.

Observe even further that although a great bit of artillery is aimed at “the canon of true religious faith” Turretin declares that the writing of Scripture “remains constant and unmoved.” The very writing of the Scriptures ensures for the Reformers a preserved, pure, and entire written word of God.

Simply put, we here at StandardSacredText.com hold to the same conclusion. God gave His word in written propositions easily, purely, and entirely. Those same propositions, by virtue of being God’s propositions, remain easily, purely, and entirely preserved in a single standard sacred text. We here at StandardSacredText.com hold that text to be the union of the Masoretic Hebrew Text of the Old Testament, and the 1881 Scrivener’s Greek New Testament. Regarding the English-speaking believing community, we believe the King James Version to be the standard sacred text for the English-speaking believing community.

William Whitaker and Revelation 20:18

Welcome to the Brickyard. This is a place to find quotes for use in your own research. The bricks are free but the building is up to you. The following quotes are from William Whitaker on Revelation 20:18. He originally wrote them in 1588.

“For we may, by parity of reason, argue thus: The authority and analogy of the other books is the same: if, therefore, it be not lawful to add to this book, then, by parity of reason, it will be unlawful to add to any other book, or detract from it.”

William Whitaker, Disputations on Holy Scripture, trans. and ed. William Fitzgerald (Orlando, FL: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 2005), 622.

“Those, therefore, who add any thing to the scripture itself, or take any thing from it, are obnoxious to this denunciation.”

William Whitaker, Disputations on Holy Scripture, trans. and ed. William Fitzgerald (Orlando, FL: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 2005), 622.

“I confess that the apostle [John] denounces an anathema against those who add any thing to that word of God which he preached; but I maintain that the whole of that word is contained in the scriptures.”

William Whitaker, Disputations on Holy Scripture, trans. and ed. William Fitzgerald (Orlando, FL: Soli Deo Gloria Publications, 2005), 623.

Scripture Endures Forever

What are we as Christians to make of these passages? Are we to disregard them as oriental hyperbole, or a literary device, or a contextually limited application? Or are we to accept the clear and conspicuous, historically anchored meaning of “forever”? To reject the truth of Scripture’s “foreverness” presents the need to reinterpret the passages below which is no small feat. And critics capriciously say, “No doctrine is effected with the reconstruction of novel texts and versions, except is this case the doctrine of Scripture’s “foreverness.”

I leave you, gentle reader, with the following list for your reading pleasure.

Job 19:24, “Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book! That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!” Psalm 12:7, Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever (לְעוֹלָֽם, olam). Psalm 33:11, “The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations (לְעוֹלָ֣ם, olam).” Psalm 105:8, “He hath remembered his covenant for ever (לְעוֹלָ֣ם, olam), the word which he commanded to a thousand generations.” Psalm 117:2, “For his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the LORD endureth for ever (לְ֜עוֹלָ֗ם, olam). Praise ye the LORD.” Psalm 119:89, “Forever (לְעוֹלָ֥ם, olam), O Lord, they word is settled in heaven.” Psalm 119:111, “Thy testimonies have I taken as an heritage for ever (לְעוֹלָ֑ם, olam): for they are the rejoicing of my heart.” Psalm 119:144, “They righteousness of thy testimonies is everlasting (לְעוֹלָ֑ם, olam); give me understanding, and I shall live.” Psalm 119:152, “Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever (לְעוֹלָ֣ם, olam).” Psalm 119:160, “Thy Word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever (וּ֜לְעוֹלָ֗ם, olam).” Ecc. 3:14, “I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever (לְעוֹלָ֔ם, olam): nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.” Isa. 30:8, “Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever (עוֹלָם, olam) and ever” or “forever to eternity.” Isaiah 40:8, “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever (עוֹלָם, olam).” Isaiah 54:10, “For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the LORD that hath mercy on thee.” Isaiah 59:21, “As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit that is upon thee, and my Words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever (עוֹלָם, olam).” Matthew 5:18, “For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass (οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ) from the law, til all be fulfilled.” Matthew 24:35, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away (οὐ μὴ παρέλθωσιν).” Luke 16:17, “And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” 1 Peter 1:23-25, “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth forever (αἰῶνα). 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: But the word of the Lord endureth forever (αἰῶνα). And this is the Word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”

What is Standard Sacred Text.com – Sacred

Eminent scholar, Daniel Wallace opines in the following manner,

“I would question whether it is an epistemologically sound principle to allow one’s presuppositions to dictate his text-critical methodology. This is neither honest to a historical investigation nor helpful to our evangelical heritage.”

Daniel Wallace, “Challenges in New Testament Textual Criticism for the Twenty-First Century” in Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Vol. 52, Iss. 1 (March 2009): 79-100. 93.

Here at StandardSacredText.com we do not question whether it is an epistemologically sound principle to allow one’s theological presuppositions to dictate text-critical methodology. Indeed, we argue the opposite. We argue that it is honest to historical investigation. Why? Well of course the Scriptures are a historical particular but so is divine revelation.

The fact that the Red Sea parted is a historical fact. According to the Christian worldview, the fact that God made the Red Sea part is also a historical fact. In fact, divine revelation is just as much a historical “artifact” as the physical document we call the Scriptures. The apostle John’s writing of the gospel of John is a historical fact. In the same way, according to the Christian worldview, God’s inspiring John to write the inspired words of the gospel of John is also a historical fact.

As such we do not exclude the Triune God or Christian theology from any of our academic endeavors whether that be linguistic, scientific, historical, or other. What we believe about what the Bible says about itself is a sacred issue, indeed, a sacred duty. And by sacred we mean set apart to God. Paul reminds us in I Corinthians 10: 31, “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” Text-critical method falls under “whatsoever ye do. ” If the glory of the Triune God is your aim in text-critical methodology then it seems something of your theological presuppositions is dictating your methodology.

If God’s glory is not the aim of the Christian, then said Christian violates Paul’s injunction. Certainly, we would say this of a marriage which has some other aim. Or a business that has some other aim. In fact, some may say that this “other aim” may amount to idolatry.

“The glory of the Triune God” is a Christian theological presupposition.
A: All the things a Christian does should be done to the glory of the Triune God.
B: Text-critical methodology is something a Christian does.
Conclusion: For a Christian, text-critical methodology should be done to the glory of the Triune God.