"The situation is somewhat complex, and many people do not understand it as a result of that complexity. But let me try to explain what is involved. ... Let me say that the concerns of some of these people [those who defend the King James Bible and its underlying textual basis] are undoubtedly good. They are zealous for the Word of God and very much concerned lest liberal or any other scholarship enter in to pervert it. But unfortunately, the basis on which they are operating is wrong, and I have always tried to do what I could in a gentle way to lead them to appreciate good, current evangelical scholarship where the Greek text and the translations are concerned" (Letter from James Boice, leader with the International Council of Biblical Inerrancy, to missionary doctor Tom Hale).
As noted earlier in this series of articles, these words were directed to a missionary medical doctor in South Asia in response to that doctor's queries about the issue of Bible texts and translations. The medical doctor had read several books and booklets I had given him. In particular he had read Which Bible? edited by David Otis Fuller, The King James Version Defended by the late Dr. Edward F. Hills, and several smaller works by the Trinitarian Bible Society and others.
Note the paternalistic, condescending attitude of Dr. Boice toward those who would defend the Textus Receptus. It would appear that there is no possibility that Dr. Boice is the one who is in error, the one who is following unsound "scholarship"! Of course he can maintain this kind of attitude toward those who have not studied the issues very thoroughly, or who, in his opinion, do not possess sufficient intelligence or education to understand the issues. But if he were writing to some of the men we have mentioned in the last section, he would doubtless demonstrate a different attitude entirely. Would he try to lead Dr. Edward Hills, Dr. David Otis Fuller, or Dr. Donald Waite "in a gentle way to appreciate good, current evangelical scholarship where the Greek text and the translations are concerned"?
Would he say to the learned translators of the King James Bible and other mighty Reformation Bibles that "the situation is somewhat complex, brethren, and many people do not understand it as a result of that complexity. But let me try to explain what is involved"!
I'm sure you understand what I am saying. This condescending, paternalistic attitude is a common feature of the writings of those who despise the TR. Surely they know that the difference between their views and those of TR supporters is not a matter of greater and lesser intelligence, but they often imply that this is the case. There is a myth here.
The most important issue in all the world is to know what and where is the Word of God. By that Word we are born again; in it we find eternal life; by it we live. As the Lord Jesus said, "It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God" (Luke 4:4). This being the case, we must have these words--all of them.
Since the issue before us is so crucial for the souls and destinies of men, is it unreasonable to believe that God would make it possible for the average saint, and especially for the average church leader, to know the truth of the matter? God loves the world so much that He gave His only begotten Son to suffer and die, and He has given a pure revelation of this love in a Book. Has this God allowed the issues surrounding the preservation and translation of the Bible to be as complex as Dr. Boice says they are? "The situation is somewhat complex, and many people do not understand it as a result of that complexity." Can it be so?
I am reminded of Matthew 11:25-27--"At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."
I am reminded of I Corinthians 1:26-29--"For ye see your calling, brethren, how that NOT MANY WISE men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and GOD HATH CHOSEN THE WEAK THINGS of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in his presence."
I am reminded of Acts 4:13--"Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were UNLEARNED AND IGNORANT MEN, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus."
I am reminded of 2 Corinthians 11:3--"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from THE SIMPLICITY that is in Christ."
I am reminded of Colossians 2:8--"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."
I am reminded of 1 John 2:27--"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."
This is not to say God does not call and use scholarly men. Certainly He does, but this is not the normal situation in the churches of God. A few--but not many--wise, mighty and noble are called. The common man has more often received the truth than the wise and mighty, who have more often than not stumbled in their pride. Even when the Son of God walked the earth such was the case. The religious scholars discounted his eternal wisdom, while "the common people heard him gladly" (Mark 12:37).
The Bible enumerates the qualifications for a pastor, but nowhere does God say that he must be a scholar. He must be trained in the Word of God; he must be a man of study; he must be ready and able to teach--but there is no qualification that he be a scholar, that he possess a M.Th. or Ph.D. Where in the Bible does God say that a pastor must master Greek and Hebrew, even? This being the case, God simply is not going to make the issue surrounding the question of the Bible translations so complex that the average church leader cannot readily know the truth of the matter.
How has God made the matter simple in His Word? First, He has given a pure Word. Second, He has promised to preserve this Word. Third, it is evident that a certain textual family, a certain type of Bible, was preserved and published throughout the world across the centuries. Fourth, this text was adopted by the Reformation translators and editors. Fifth, this is the pure, preserved Word of God and should not be discarded for a text which was rejected in past centuries by God's people.
These facts are not complex at all. And THEY ARE FACTS, by the way. There are certain details and questions in the midst of these simple facts which admittedly are complex. There are things hard to be answered. But the basic, overall issues are quite simple and straightforward; so much so that the average man of God can grasp them and know where the Word of God is today.
I therefore reject Dr. Boice's contention that "the situation is somewhat complex, and many people do not understand it as a result of that complexity." The truth of the matter is that the situation is rather simple and many scholars stumble at the simplicity of the truth!
We have looked at six myths which are continually promoted by those who are opposed to the idea that the pure Word of God is preserved in that Text and in those Versions which dominated non-Catholic Christian life for the past nineteen centuries. Obviously no attempt has been made to answer all of the questions which can be asked on this subject. Our goal was singular: Brethren, beware of myths which are disguised as truth.
