Bi 401 Study Guide

School of Religion

Bi 401 Bible Doctrines

Online Course Study Guide

OVERVIEW ...................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 3 BIBLIOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF SCRIPTURE ............................................................................. 7 Questions for Appendix A (Panosian) .............................................................................. 14 Questions for Appendix B (Wisdom) ................................................................................ 16 Questions for A Pictorial History of our English Bible ........................................................ 17 THEOLOGY PROPER: THE DOCTRINE OF GOD ......................................................................... 21 CHRISTOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST ............................................................................. 27 PNEUMATOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ........................................................ 31 ANGELOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS ............................................................................. 38

APPENDIX A: WHAT IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD?...................................................... 45 APPENDIX B: LIGHT ON THE BIBLE TEXT DEBATE ................................................................... 51

1

OVERVIEW

PRIMARY TEXT

Ryrie, Charles C.. Basic Theology: A Popular and Systematic Guide to Understanding

Biblical Truth. 1986; reprint, Chicago: Moody, 1999.

SUPPLEMENTAL TEXTS

Beale, David. A Pictorial History of Our English Bible. Greenville, S.C.: BJUP, 1982. Panosian, Edward. What is the Inspired Word of God? Greenville, S.C.: BJUP,

1979. Wisdom, Thurman. Light on the Bible Text Debate. Greenville, S.C.: BJUP, 1984.

SYLLABUS This syllabus is designed to maximize your learning through the reading assignments. Although the study questions identify the primary textbook items that you will be held responsible for on quizzes and tests, questions for the quizzes and test may be drawn from material outside the questions on this study guide.

3

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE INTRODUCTION

All items: daily quiz & unit test

Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam WHO SHOULD READ THEOLOGY? 1. Is everyone a theologian (9)?* 2. What is the simple definition of theology (9)? 3. What is supposed to be the result of healthy doctrine (10)? CHAPTER 1: CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS

1. What is the meaning of the words theos and logos that make up the word theology

(13)? 2. What 3 elements are included in the general concept of theology (13)? 3. What is Ryries formal definition of theology (13, 15)?* 4. What is the focus of historical theology (14)?* 5. What is Ryries technical definition of biblical theology (14)?* 6. What does systematic theology do (15)?* CHAPTER 2: SOME PRESUPPOSITIONS

1. What is the watershed or basic presupposition of Christian theology (16)?* 2. What must come before theological systematization (16)?

4

3. What are Ryries 3 interpretive presuppositions (16-17)?* 4. What is the difference between the OT and NT as sources for theology (17)? 5. What guidelines does Ryrie give for the proper use of proof texts (17)?* 6. What is the best answer when dealing with questions that Scripture does not

answer (18)?* 7. What are Ryries 4 personal presuppositions (18-19)? 8. Does exegesis provide all the answers for the questions of theology? Explain (19). 9. What is worship (19)? CHAPTER 3: THE QUESTION OF AUTHORITY

1. What is the hallmark of liberalism, and what are the 3 vehicles of divine

communication in liberalism (20)?* 2. What did Schleiermacher develop (20)? 3. With what theological authority is Immanuel Kant associated (21)? 4. What is the relationship between neo-orthodoxy, liberalism, and conservatism

(21)? 5. How did Karl Barth define the Word (21)? 6. What kind of authority does the Bible have in neo-orthodoxy? Explain (21).* 7. Where does authority ultimately rest in Roman Catholicism (22)?*

5

8. To what does conservative Protestantism or orthodoxy limit the ground of religious authority (22)?*

9. In what 3 ways do conservatives practically deny the Bible as their sole basis of

authority (22)?

7

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE BIBLIOLOGY


Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam CHAPTER 9: SPECIAL REVELATION

1. How does general revelation differ from special revelation (71)?* 2. What are the 10 avenues of special revelation, and which is most inclusive (71-73)? 3. According to Ryrie, why does a preacher or teacher today not qualify as a

prophet (72)? 4. What are 4 characteristics of the revelation in the Bible (73)? 5. What 2 approaches exist as to the credibility of the scriptural revelation (73)? 6. What 2 contemporary views of revelation does Ryrie reject as subjective,

unstable, and sub-Christian (73-74)? CHAPTER 10: THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION

1. What is the significance of 1 Timothy 5:18 for the doctrine of inspiration (77)?* 2. What is the significance of 2 Peter 3:16 for the doctrine of inspiration (77)?* 3. What is the meaning of the word translated inspired in 2 Timothy 3:16, and how

does Ryrie sum up the claims of this verse (78)?* 4. What is the significance of 2 Peter 1:21 for the doctrine of inspiration (79)?* 5. How does Ryrie sum up the claims of 1 Corinthians 2:13 (80)?*

8

6. What book of the Bible is an example of the use of researched material in connection with inspiration (80)?

7. What is Ryries full definition of inspiration (81)?* CHAPTER 11: DEFECTIONS FROM THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION

1. What is natural inspiration (83)? 2. What is dynamic or mystical inspiration (83)? 3. What is degree inspiration (84)? 4. What is the contemporary expression of partial inspiration, and what is the

problem with this view (84)? 5. What is concept inspiration, and what is the obvious fallacy in this view (85)?* 6. What is Barthian inspiration, and what is the problem with this view (85-86)?* CHAPTER 12: THE INERRANCY OF THE BIBLE

1. Can one be a biblicist and deny inerrancy (87)? 2. What is the result if one allows for errors in the Bible?* Illustrate (87-88).* 3. How does Ryrie respond to those who argue that one should not teach inerrancy

because the Bible does not clearly teach it (89-90)?* 4. How does Ryrie respond to those who argue that inerrancy is a nonessential

doctrine because it applies only to the unavailable originals of Scripture (90)?* 5. How does Ryrie respond to those who argue that inerrancy is a recent teaching

and thus should not be a matter of concern (91-92)?*

9

6. How does Ryrie define inerrancy, and what literary features does this definition allow for (93)?*

7. What other doctrine parallels the divine-human nature of Scripture and

demonstrates that human involvement does not inevitably involve sin (94)? 8. Note Ryries statement about overemphasizing either the divine side or the

human side of inspiration (95). CHAPTER 13: INERRANCY AND THE TEACHINGS OF CHRIST

1. What is the deductive evidence for inerrancy (97)?* 2. What 2 points does Ryrie make about Jesus view of the Bible from the account of

His temptation (97-98)? 3. What do Christs references to Adam and Eve, Noah, and Jonah demonstrate (98-99)? 4. Explain the Lords promise in Matthew 5:17-18 (99-101).* 5. Explain Christs 3 claims regarding the Bible in John 10:31-38 (101-2).* 6. On what grammatical feature in Exodus 3 did Jesus base His argument for the

resurrection in Matthew 22:23-33 (104)? 7. On what grammatical feature in Psalm 110 did Jesus base His argument for the

Messiahs divine-human nature in Matthew 22:41-46 (105-6)? CHAPTER 14: PROBLEM PASSAGES

1. What is the inerrantists basic outlook on problems in the Bible (107)?* 2. What 2 arguments does Ryrie advance against the idea that Genesis 1 and 2

contain conflicting accounts of Creation (108-9)?

10

3. Explain Ryries answer to the question about Cains wife (109-10). 4. Explain Ryries answer to the question of who caused David to number Israel

(110-11). 5. Note Ryries statement about scribal errors and the point that inerrancy cannot

be extended to copies of Scripture (111).* 6. How does Ryrie explain Jesus statement about the mustard seed, and why is this

particular issue so important doctrinally (113-14)? CHAPTER 15: THE CANON

1. What is the derivation of the word canon, and what is its twofold meaning (119)?* 2. What is meant by self-authentication (119)?* 3. Since what year has the Christian church considered the canon to be complete,

and what is the implication of the churchs decision (120)?* 4. Note the claims of divine authority in the Law and the Prophets as indicative of

canonicity (120-21).* 5. What does Malachi 4:5 indicate about the OT canon (121)?* 6. Note Ryries summary statement about the Dead Sea Scrolls (121). 7. What did Josephus say about the OT canon (121)? 8. What 3 NT factors does Ryrie cite as evidence for the OT canon (122)? 9. What are the 3 tests for canonicity (122)?

11

10. What is the significance of the following verses for NT canonicity (123)? Colossians 4:16 and 1 Thessalonians 4:15: 1 Timothy 5:18: 2 Peter 3:16: 11. What church council (place/date) fixed the limits of the NT canon as including

all 27 books as we have them today (124)? CHAPTER 16: THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE

1. Define hermeneutics and exegesis (125).* 2. Does every interpreter of the Bible have a system of hermeneutics (125)? 3. What are the 4 hermeneutical systems (125-28)?* 4. What 2 labels are more precise than literal (126)?* 5. Become familiar with Ryries response to semiallegorical interpretation (126-28). 6. In what one area of Bible doctrine do many evangelicals fail to interpret literally,

and to what position does this lead (128)?* 7. What 3 points does Ryrie give as rationale for literal hermeneutics (128)? 8. What are Ryries 4 principles of normal hermeneutics (129-30).* 9. What is sensus plenior (129)? 10. What is the most common definition of illumination, and what 2 passages

(book/chapter) does Ryrie cite as the principal passages on this doctrine (132)?

13

APPENDIX A: WHAT IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD?

BY EDWARD M. PANOSIAN

All items: daily quiz & unit test Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam

1. Why did God not allow the autographs of Scripture (no golden plates let down

from heaven) to continue in existence? 2. Why can we say with certainty that we have every word of the Word of God

even though differences exist among the manuscripts?* 3. On what text was the first printed edition of the Greek NT based, and who

produced this NT?* What was his ecclesiastical affiliation? How old were the manuscripts he used?* What is the source of his last 6 verses of Revelation?

4. What does Textus Receptus mean? 5. What was Erasmuss view of Christianity? What was his attitude toward the

Reformation? 6. What factors make the KJV without peer among English translations? 7. To what extent can a version be described as inspired?* 8. What 2 men edited the second major text of the Greek NT in the nineteenth

century?* What was their ecclesiastical affiliation? What newly available manuscripts did they use, what is the importance of these manuscripts, how old are they, and what was the point of using them?*

9. What is Panosians response to the charge that Westcott and Hort held to

unorthodox doctrine? 10. Who are the 2 greatest American Greek scholars who were strongly conservative

and yet defended the Westcott-Hort text?

14

11. What is the amount and nature of the substantial variations among the various NT manuscripts?*

12. In evaluating Bible translations, what factor should be considered in addition to

the recovery of old manuscripts? In this regard, to what extent is the KJV today the same as it was in 1611?

13. In what area does Panosian give a very careful and necessary warning?* In this

regard, which modern translations does he reject, and which does he endorse? 14. What simple questions of logic are raised by designating a particular version of

the Bible as specially inspired? 15. What truth about Gods Word deserves more emphasis than matters of

manuscripts and translations?

15

APPENDIX B: LIGHT ON THE BIBLE TEXT DEBATE

BY THURMAN WISDOM

All items: daily quiz & unit test Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam

1. What is textual criticism?* 2. What are the 3 sub-groups within the KJV-only position?* 3. Who has stated that the KJV is superior to the originals, and what dogma is

demanded by this position? 4. What are the very serious problems with the Received Text position? 5. What is the most reasonable and viable of the KJV positions? 6. What is the key issue between Majority Text and Westcott-Hort proponents?*

Summarize the 2 general positions on this issue.* 7. Over what percent of the verses of the NT does the whole textual controversy

revolve?* 8. How does Wisdom respond to the argument that the Textus Receptus is a

providentially approved text? 9. How does Wisdom respond to the argument that the Westcott-Hort text

undermines biblical doctrines? 10. Why do some modern translations undermine biblical doctrines? 11. Why does Matthew 5:18 not support any textual position?

16

12. How should the average Christian handle the question of textual variations? 13. In what does true orthodoxy consist?

17

A PICTORIAL HISTORY OF OUR ENGLISH BIBLE BY DAVID BEALE


Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam 1. What phrase describes Gods inspiring of all Scripture equally (1)?* 2. What does the term testament designate in Scripture (2)? 3. What are the 3 divisions of the Jewish (Hebrew) OT (2)?* 4. Within about how many years after Jesus resurrection was all the NT written

(3)? 5. What church council (place/date) officially recognized our NT books as

canonical (4)?* 6. How old are the earliest available lists of NT books nearly identical to ours (4)? 7. What are the 4 basic principles of canonicity employed by the early church (4)?* 8. What title was given to John Wyclif because of the work he did (8)? 9. From which ancient version did John Wyclif translate (9)? 10. What was the first English Bible (name/year) (6, 10)?* 11. What was the first major book in the west (name/year) to be printed from

movable type (12)? 12. What most important preparation for the Reformation was completed by 1500

(14)?

18

13. What Bible (name/year) became the standard for all future English Bibles (19),* and how much of the King James translation was drawn from this Bible (20)?

14. What was the first complete English Bible (name/year) ever printed (21)?* 15. Whose translations were behind the Matthew Bible (1537), and why was it so

named (25)? 16. What was the first Bible (name/year) to be specifically authorized for public use

in English churches, and why was it so named (26-27)? 17. What was the first English Bible (name/year) to be translated entirely from the

original languages, the first to have numbered verses, and the one to be carried by the Pilgrims on the Mayflower (30-31, 33)?*

18. Who had first introduced NT verse divisions, and when (31)? 19. What unpopular version (name/year) was translated to compete with the

Geneva Bible (36)? 20. Why did King James I reject the Geneva Bible (39)?* 21. How many translators actually engaged in producing the KJV? Into how many

groups were they divided, and where did they work (39)? 22. How many complete or partial editions of the KJV were produced between 1611

and 1800 (43)? 23. What were the 3 most ancient and significant Greek manuscripts not available to

the King James translators (45)?* 24. Which of the 182 editions of the KJV produced between 1611 and 1644 was the

most significant, and why (46-47)? 25. What does the Latin word codex mean (48)?*

19

26. What were uncials (48)?* 27. What are the proper name, dates of origin, and present location of Codex A (48, 50)? 28. What are the proper name, dates of origin, and present location of Codex B (50)? 29. What are the proper name, dates of origin, and present location of Codex Aleph

(52)? Who discovered it, and where (52-53)? What is its present location (56)? 30. Who edited the London Polyglot, and how many languages did it include (57)? 31. What does the term Massorah mean, and to what does it refer (58-59)? 32. During what centuries were the Masoretes particularly active? What is their

great contribution (59)?* 33. What does Peshitta mean, and to what does it refer? During what century was the

Peshitta NT used (61)? 34. What circumstances provided Luther the opportunity to translate the Bible into

German, and when did he begin translating the NT (63)? 35. What passage was Erasmus pressured to insert from the Vulgate into the third

edition of his Greek NT (65)? 36. What did Luthers Bible do for the German language (65), and why did a

contemporary call Luther the German Cicero (66)? 37. Note all the glossary terms (67-68).

21

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE THEOLOGY PROPER


Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam CHAPTER 4: THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD

1. What 2 facts does the Bible teach regarding the possibility of knowing God (27)? 2. What are the 2 orientations of a full knowledge of God (28)? 3. What are the 4 purposes of the knowledge of God (28-29)? 4. What are the 4 prerequisites to the knowledge of God (29-30)? 5. In contrast to other scholarly endeavors, what must be our attitude in studying

God (29)? CHAPTER 5: THE REVELATION OF GOD

1. What is the difference between general revelation and special revelation (31)?* 2. In what 3 ways is general revelation general (31)? 3. What is the cosmological argument for the existence of God (31-32)?* 4. What 2 key passages (book/chapter) show creation to be a channel of revelation

(33)?* 5. What is the teleological argument for the existence of God (34)?* 6. What is the anthropological argument for the existence of God (35)?*

22

7. In what chapter of Acts does Paul argue in a manner similar to the anthropological argument (36)?

8. What is the ontological argument for the existence of God (36)?* 9. Do the traditional arguments for the existence of God prove the existence of the

God of the Bible?* What is the value of these arguments (37)?* 10. How is God just in condemning man (37-38)? CHAPTER 6: THE PERFECTIONS OF GOD

1. What are attributes?* What is the significance of calling Gods attributes His

perfections? Note that Gods perfections are not component parts and that He is not the sum total of His perfections (39).

2. Identify and define the 3 traditional classifications of Gods attributes (40). 3. Define the 14 perfections of God discussed by Ryrie (41-50).* Eternity: Freedom: Holiness: Immutability: Infinity: Love: Omnipotence: Omnipresence: Omniscience: Righteousness: Simplicity:

23

Sovereignty: Truth: Unity: 4. What application does Ryrie make from the freedom of God (42)? 5. What is the attribute by which God wanted to be especially known in OT times

(42)?* 6. If God is immutable, how can it be said that He repents (43)? 7. How does Ryrie argue against universalism (45)? 8. In what 2 areas is Gods omnipotence limited (45)? 9. What is Ryries approach to the problem of divine sovereignty and human

responsibility (49)?* CHAPTER 7: THE NAMES OF GOD

1. What is the function of Gods many names (51)?* 2. What is the proper interpretation of the plural form of Elohim (52)? 3. What 4 acts are closely related to Elohim (52)?* 4. By what title did God appear to the patriarchs to give comfort and confirmation

of the Abrahamic Covenant (52)?* 5. What does El Elyon mean and emphasize (53)? 6. What does El Olam mean and emphasize (53)?

24

7. What is Gods personal name,* and to whom was the deep significance of this name revealed (53)?

8. According to Ryrie, what is the principal idea of I AM WHO I AM (53)?* 9. What is the origin of the word Jehovah (54)? 10. According to Ryrie, what 3 facets are included in Yahweh (54)?* 11. What is the significance of Yahweh Sabaoth (54)?* 12. What does the divine title Adonai convey, and what is its NT equivalent (55)?* 13. What is the NT equivalent to Elohim (55)?* 14. What verse seems to be the clearest designation of Christ as God (56)?* CHAPTER 8: THE TRIUNITY OF GOD

1. In what sense is the Trinity a biblical teaching (58)?* 2. What are the 5 intimations of the Trinity in the OT (58-59)? 3. What are the 2 paths of evidence for the Trinity in the NT (60)?* 4. How does Ryrie respond to the Jehovahs Witnesses translation of John 1:1 (60)? 5. What 3 passages does Ryrie cite for the Triunity of God?* Which provides the

strongest support, and why (61)?* 6. What is the significance of John 10:30 for the doctrine of the Trinity (61)?

25

7. What is meant by the ontological Trinity, and what are Ryries 3 points in explaining this expression (61-62)?*

8. What is the purpose of the expression eternal generation, and what is Ryries

evaluation of this concept (62)? 9. What is meant by the procession of the Spirit, and what verse teaches this

concept (62)? 10. What is meant by the economical Trinity, and what is the role of each Person of

the Godhead in this regard (62)?* 11. In the final analysis, what is the nature of the doctrine of the Trinity (62-63)?* 12. What did Dynamic Monarchianism teach regarding the Trinity (64)? 13. What did Modalistic Monarchianism teach regarding the Trinity (64)? 14. What did Arius teach regarding the Trinity, and who was his opponent (64)?* 15. What term was chosen at Nicea to describe the relationship between the Father

and the Son, and what does this term mean (65)?* 16. What 3 Cappadocian theologians gave definitive shape to the doctrine of the

Trinity in the second half of the fourth century (65)? 17. What question was settled at the Council of Constantinople (66)? 18. Who wrote the Western churchs final formulation of Trinitarian doctrine (66)?* 19. What did the Synod of Toledo add to the Constantinople Creed (66)? 20. What 5 examples does Ryrie give to illustrate the ramifications of the doctrine of

the Trinity (67-68)?

27

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE CHRISTOLOGY


Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam CHAPTER 40: THE PREINCARNATE CHRIST

1. Distinguish between Christs preexistence and eternality (273-74). 2. What modern-day group has an Arian-like Christology that denies the eternality

of the Logos (274)?* 3. What does the term charakter in Hebrews 1:3 mean (275)? 4. In what passage (book/chapter) does Christ explicitly claim eternality (275)?* 5. What are the 2 activities of the preincarnate Christ (275)?* 6. How do we know that the Angel of Yahweh was a preincarnate appearance of

Christ (275-76)? CHAPTER 41: THE INCARNATION OF CHRIST

1. What does John 1 mean when it speaks of the Word becoming flesh (277)?* 2. What does the term Immanuel in Isaiah 7:14 mean (277)?* 3. What is the meaning of the Hebrew word almah in Isaiah 7:14,* and what are the

3 interpretations of the individual referred to in this passage (278)? 4. What was the purpose of the Virgin Birth (279)?* 5. What is the common distinction between the genealogies of Matthew and Luke

(279)?

28

6. What are the 7 purposes of the incarnation (281-82)? 7. What is the significance of the title Son of Man (282, 287)?* CHAPTER 42: THE PERSON OF CHRIST INCARNATE

1. What church council (with date) produced the definitive statement on the person

of Christ, and what is Ryries concise description of this statement (284)?* 2. What are 4 arguments for the deity of Christ (284-86)?* 3. What is the significance of the title Son of God (285)?* 4. What are 4 arguments for the humanity of Christ (286-87)?* 5. What does the expression hypostatic union mean (287)?* 6. How should the word nature be understood with reference to Christ (287-88)? 7. Define the following Christological heresies (289-90). Docetism: Arianism: Apollinarianism: Nestorianism: CHAPTER 43: CHRIST: PROPHET, PRIEST, AND KING

1. What passage (book/chapter) predicts the coming of a prophet like Moses (292)? 2. What are the 4 major messages of Christ recorded in the Gospels (293)? 3. In what 2 ways was Christs prophetic ministry authenticated, and what was the

test case of this ministry (296)?

29

4. What are the 4 features of Melchizedekan priesthood (297)? CHAPTER 44: THE SELF-EMPTYING OF CHRIST

1. What is the central passage (book/chapter) on the kenosis (299)?* 2. What does the term morphe in Philippians 2:6 mean (300)? 3. What is Ryries definition of the kenosis (301)?* 4. What are 2 false meanings of the kenosis (301-2)? CHAPTER 45: THE SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST

1. Cite the statement that asserts the sinlessness of Christ in each of the following

verses (303-4). Luke 1:35 2 Corinthians 5:21* 1 Peter 2:22 1 John 3:5 Hebrews 4:15* 2. Summarize Hodges argument for Christs peccability (304).* 3. Summarize Shedds argument for Christs impeccability (304-6).* 4. What are 4 results of Christs testings (306)? CHAPTER 46: THE RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION OF CHRIST

1. Summarize the 4-fold importance of Christs Resurrection (308). To His person: To His work:

30

To the Gospel: To us: 2. What are the 2 categories of evidence for Christs Resurrection (309-10).* 3. What passage (book/chapter) provides the most detailed description of Christ

risen and ascended (310)?* 4. What is the significance of the expression firstborn from the dead (310)?* 5. What passage (book/chapter) provides the principal description of the event of

Christs Ascension (311)? 6. What was the significance of the Ascension for the work of Christ (312)? CHAPTER 47: THE POST-ASCENSION MINISTRIES OF CHRIST

1. What important event depended on Christs going to the Father (313)?* 2. What are 3 present ministries of Christ (314)?* 3. What does Ephesians 4:9 mean by Christs descent into the lower parts of the

earth (314)? 4. What are 3 future ministries of Christ (315-6)?*

31

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE PNEUMATOLOGY

All items: daily quiz & final exam

CHAPTER 59: WHO IS THE HOLY SPIRIT?

1. How is the Spirit often depicted when His personality is denied (395)? 2. What 3 attributes of personality does the Spirit possess (395)? 3. What fact demonstrates that the Spirit has feelings (395)? 4. What 4 actions of a person does the Spirit exhibit (396)? 5. What significant grammatical consideration in John 16:13-14 supports the

personality of the Spirit (396-97)? 6. What is the meaning of another in John 14:16 (397)? 7. What 3 exclusively divine attributes does the Bible ascribe to the Spirit (397)? 8. What 3 exclusively divine actions does the Bible attribute to the Spirit (397)? 9. In what way does the NT identify the Spirit as Yahweh (398)? 10. How does Matthew 28:19 argue for the deity of the Spirit (398)? CHAPTER 60: THE HOLY SPIRIT IN OLD TESTAMENT TIMES

1. What are the 5 activities of creation in which the Spirit was clearly involved (399-400)? 2. What verse provides the most inclusive statement regarding the Spirit as the

Agent of revelation and inspiration (400)?

32

3. According to Godet, in what sense does the whole meaning of the statement dwelleth with you, and shall be in you (Jn. 14:17) consist (401)?

4. What are Ryries 3 points regarding the nature of the Spirits ministry to people

in the OT (401-2)? 5. In what way did the Spirit minister to the entire nation of Israel in the OT (402)? 6. What 6 ministries of the Spirit are not definitively recorded in the OT (402)? CHAPTER 61: THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF OUR LORD

1. What are the 4 aspects of the ministry of the Spirit in the life of Christ (404)? 2. To what office of Christ was the Spirits ministry related (404)? 3. What miracle is especially related to Jesus Messianic claims and the empowering

of the Spirit (also the most frequently recorded miracle) (404-5)? 4. What chapter of Matthew records the conflict Jesus had with the Pharisees over

the Spirit (405-6)? 5. What was the only logical conclusion to be reached by Jesus exorcisms (406)? 6. According to Ryrie, why was it unforgivable to misunderstand the power of the

Spirit (406)? 7. According to Ryrie, can the unpardonable sin be committed today? Why or why

not (407)? CHAPTER 62: THE SPIRIT INDWELLING

1. What are Ryries 3 points regarding the people indwelt by the Spirit (409)?

33

2. In what verse does Paul declare that not to have the Spirit is the same as not belonging to Christ (409)?

3. What doctrine is inseparable from the permanent indwelling of the Spirit (410)? 4. How does Ryrie respond to the objection that the Bible contains illustrations of

temporary indwelling (411)? 5. How does Ryrie explain the delay in the giving of the Spirit to the Samaritans in

Acts 8 (411-12)? 6. How does Ryrie explain the indwelling of John the Baptists disciples at Ephesus

in Acts 19 (412)? 7. What event established the normal Gentile pattern for receiving the Spirit (412)? 8. How does Ryrie define the NT anointing by the Spirit (412)? 9. What are Ryries 3 points of application regarding the indwelling of the Spirit

(413)? CHAPTER 63: THE SPIRIT SEALING

1. What 3 passages (book/chapter) speak of the Spirits sealing (414)? 2. When does sealing take place, and how do we know this (414)? 3. What is the duration of sealing, and what does this guarantee (415)? 4. What 4 ideas are included in the concept of sealing (415)? CHAPTER 64: THE SPIRIT BAPTIZING

1. Who first predicted the baptism of the Spirit (417)?

34

2. What is the distinctive purpose of the Spirits baptism, and what does this imply about when it began (417)? When did Jesus say it would happen for the first time (418)?

3. What 4 reasons does Ryrie list for the confusion regarding the Spirits baptizing

(417)? 4. What is the central text on the Spirits baptism, and what does it clearly state

(418)? 5. What 2 consequences result from the Spirits baptism (419)? 6. What is the Neo-pentecostal approach to the Spirits baptism, and how does

Ryrie respond to this view (419-21; note chart on 422)? CHAPTER 65: THE SPIRIT GIFTING

1. What are the 3 key chapters in the Pauline Epistles that discuss spiritual gifts

(423)? 2. What does the word charisma mean (423)? 3. After discussing what a spiritual gift is not, how does Ryrie define the expression

positively (424)? 4. What passage (book/chapter) makes it clear that all believers have at least one

spiritual gift (425)? 5. What are Ryries 5 steps for discovering and developing ones spiritual gifts (426-29)? 6. Why should the believer not limit his service to the area of his spiritual gift (428)? 7. Define the following spiritual gifts (429-32). Apostleship:

35

Prophecy: Miracles & healings: Tongues: Interpretation of tongues: Evangelism: Pastor: Serving: Teaching: Faith: Exhortation: Distinguishing spirits: Showing mercy: Giving: Administration: Wisdom & knowledge: 8. What were the 2 purposes of interpreted tongues (430)? CHAPTER 66: THE SPIRIT FILLING

1. How does Ryrie define spirituality from 1 Corinthians 2:15 (433)? 2. What is the key to producing spirituality in the believer (433)? 3. What are the 2 facets of Spirit filling (434)? 4. What are the 3 characteristics of Spirit filling in the second sense (435-36)?

36

5. According to Ryrie, what is not and what is the way to be filled with the Spirit (437)?

CHAPTER 67: OTHER MINISTRIES OF THE SPIRIT

1. What is the content of all the truth that the Spirit teaches believers (439)? 2. What is the result that indicates whether the Spirit has been teaching (439-40)? 3. What does the anointing in 1 John 2 mean (440)? 4. What 3 ministries of the Spirit are discussed in Romans 8 (440-41)? 5. What are the 3 aspects of sanctification (442)? 6. Who is the prominent Agent in progressive sanctification (443)? CHAPTER 68: HISTORY OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE SPIRIT

1. What view of the Montanists was rejected by the church (445)? 2. What Trinitarian issue was settled at each of the following councils (448)? Nicaea: Constantinople: Toledo: 3. What 2 aspects of the Spirits work did the Reformers especially emphasize

(449)? 4. What group essentially replaced the Spirits work in regeneration with the

human will (450)? 5. What Puritan wrote an important work on the Spirit (450)?

37

6. What aspect of the Spirits work did the Plymouth Brethren develop (451)? 7. How do most neo-orthodox writers view the Spirit (451)? 8. How does the Pentecostalism view the baptism and gifts of the Spirit (452)?

38

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE ANGELOLOGY

All items: daily quiz & final exam

CHAPTER 17: THE EXISTENCE OF ANGELS

1. What are 3 characteristics of the biblical revelation regarding angels (138)? 2. What is the meaning of both the Hebrew and Greek words for angels (138)? 3. How does the OT always present angels (138)? 4. Which book of the Bible contains more references to angels than any other (139)? 5. What are some indications that Jesus believed in the reality of angels (139)? CHAPTER 18: THE CREATION OF ANGELS

1. What biblical fact indicates the general time when the angels were created (141)? 2. What 2 points does Ryrie make regarding the state of the angels at their creation

(141)? CHAPTER 19: THE NATURE OF ANGELS

1. What are Ryries 5 points regarding the nature of angels (143-45)? 2. Why do angels qualify as personalities (143)? 3. Why do angels evidently have greater knowledge than humans (143)? 4. What does Ryrie mean when he describes angels as finite spirit beings (144)?

39

5. Will there ever be more or fewer angels than there are now? Why or why not (144)?

6. What 2 passages (book/chapter) unite to teach that angels are higher creatures

than men (145)? 7. What passage (book/verse) teaches that originally angels were holy creatures

(145)? 8. What passage (book/chapter) refers to elect angels (145)? 9. What is Ryries conclusion regarding the nature of angels following their

probationary test (145)? CHAPTER 20: THE ORGANIZATION OF ANGELS

1. What is meant by myriads in Hebrews 12:22 and Revelation 5:11 (146)? 2. What practical point does Ryrie make from the organization of angels and

demons (146)? 3. Who is the only angel designated as an archangel in Scripture (146)? 4. What does Jude 9 say about Michael (147)? 5. What are the 5 expressions the NT uses to describe the governmental rulers

among the angels (147)? 6. To what angelic order did Satan belong, and what is the function of this order

(148)? 7. What is the function of the seraphim (148)? 8. What was Gabriels special function (148)?

40

9. What are the 2 possible interpretations of the angels of the churches in Revelation 23 (149)?

CHAPTER 21: THE MINISTRY OF ANGELS

1. What is the primary ministry of angels in relation to God (150)? 2. When do angels appear to be unusually active? Give examples (150-51). 3. In what 4 ways were angels active during the earthly life of Christ (151)? 4. Which angel guards Israel (152)? 5. What verse identifies the angels basic ministry of helping believers (152)? 6. What 5 specific ministries have angels performed in helping believers (152)? 7. What reason does Ryrie suggest for the angels observing of the conduct of

redeemed people (153)? CHAPTER 22: THE REALITY OF SATAN

1. What are Ryries 3 arguments for the personality of Satan (157-58)? 2. What is the significance of the following names given to Satan (158-60)? Satan: Devil: Serpent: Great red dragon: Accuser of the brethren: Tempter: Beelzebul: Belial:

41

CHAPTER 23: THE CREATION AND SIN OF SATAN

1. What is Ryries interpretation of Ezekiel 28, and what are the 5 points he makes

from the passage regarding Satans original position (162-63)? 2. What is the only verse in the Bible that states exactly the origin of sin (163)? 3. How does Ryrie explain the relation between sin and Gods eternal plan (163-64)? 4. What was Satans particular sin, according to 1 Timothy 3:6 (164)? 5. What is Ryries interpretation of Isaiah 14, and what are the 5 I wills of Satan

that he draws from this passage (164-65)? 6. What NT passage (book/chapter) refers to the fall of Satan (164)? 7. What is the meaning of the Hebrew term translated Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12

(164)? 8. What was Satans plan in rebelling against God (164)? CHAPTER 24: THE ACTIVITIES OF SATAN

1. According to Ryrie, what was the basic purpose of Christs temptation (167)? 2. In what 3 specific areas did Satan tempt Christ, and to what 3 categories of

general temptation do these correspond (167)? 3. What is the principal tactic Satan uses to attack God and His program (168)? 4. What is Satans principal activity in relation to nations, and how does he perform

this activity (169)? 5. What are 3 areas in which Satan tempts believers (169-70)?

42

6. In what 3 areas does Satan accuse and oppose believers (170)? CHAPTER 25: SATANS WORLD

1. In whose writings do most of the occurrences of the word cosmos appear (172)? 2. What are the 3 facets to the theological definition of the cosmos (172)? 3. What is Satans aim in the cosmos, and how does he achieve this aim (173)? 4. What are Ryries 3 points regarding the Christian and the cosmos, and what 2

guidelines does he give for being properly related to it (174-75)? CHAPTER 26: THE REALITY OF DEMONS

1. How does Ryrie establish that Christ believed in the existence of demons (179)? 2. What evidence does Ryrie cite for concluding that demons are fallen angels

(181)? 3. What are the 3 possible interpretations of the sin mentioned in Genesis 6:2-4

(182)? 4. What are the various categories of demons, with Scripture references

(book/chapter; chart on 183)? CHAPTER 27: WHAT ARE DEMONS LIKE?

1. What 4 facts indicate that demons are genuine persons (184)? 2. How has the knowledge of demons been enhanced by experience (185)? 3. What 4 expressions indicate the immoral nature of demons (185)?

43

CHAPTER 28: WHAT DO DEMONS DO?

1. What are 4 examples of Gods use of demons to carry out His purposes (187)? 2. What 3 false doctrines do demons teach (188)? 3. What principle regarding the activity of demons should be drawn from Daniel

10:13 and Revelation 16:13-16 (188)? 4. What 3 activities do demons perform in relation to people (188-89)? 5. What 2 suggestions does Ryrie give after surveying the biblical data relative to

demon possession (191-92)?

45

APPENDIX A

WHAT IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD?

BY EDWARD M. PANOSIAN, PH.D.

Because some otherwise good men have become authors of confusion concerning translations and versions of the Holy Bible, we, as a people of God in this twenty-first century of grace, may profit from remembering what the history of the Church of Jesus Christ has known concerning that blessed Book. The psalmist (Ps. 68:11) declared: The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it. The apostle (2 Tim. 3:16a) pronounced: All scripture is given by inspiration of God. God breathed, and what His chosen writers wrote were the exact words of the Word of God, as holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (2 Pet. 1:21b).

God gave it and men published it. But centuries before publish had come to mean to set in type, print, bind, and distribute, the scattering of the Word was by preaching and proclaiming and by copying by hand (manuscripting) the words receivedthe law, the prophe-cies, the histories, the epistles. With meticulous care the Old Testament books were handed down as disci-plined and devoted scribes labored to copy the sacred writings onto vellum rolls. Wearing clean, fresh clothing, using new pens, counting words on pages, repeating the last word on the previous page as the first word of the next to guard against an omission, destroying inaccurate and worn-out copies, conscious that they were handling Gods Word to man, faithful men accomplished, under the continu-ing illumination of the Holy Spirit of

God, the preservation and transmission of that Word.

Notice here the principle of the economy of God. God uses men. He who could command angels to do His bidding uses menyet it is God that worketh. Just as men were vehicles through which He chose to give the Word, so also were men given the responsibility to hand down to each subsequent generation that same Word. Yet God guaranteed His Word, because for ever . . . settled in heaven (Ps. 119:89), would never be lost. We have no golden plates let down from heaven, which God knew men would worship more than the God who gave them; we have the living Word of God. Our not having the original autograph manu-scripts written by the human Bible writers is no more a hindrance to our knowledge of the words of God than the destruction of the original copy of the Declaration of Independence would be to our knowledge of its very words. The copies of both are legion; and, far more, the Bible is preserved by God.

The text of the Hebrew Old Testament was a settled question already in Christs day. It was accepted by the Jews, by the Christians, and by Christ Himself. The matter of dispute today among those who should be brethren in obedience to the Word of God is the text of the New Testament, the Greek text. Since the New Testament was written almost fourteen centuries before movable type printing was in use in the Western world, all copies were necessarily made by hand by careful

46

scribes. Obviously, minor differences appeared among these, in spite of the best efforts of good men. But with hundreds of manuscriptsactually thousandsavailable today, we can say with certainty that we have every word of the Word of God.

The majority of the Greek manuscripts known and available in the early sixteenth century were of what was called the Byzantine text. It was these that were used by the Roman Catholic scholar Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam in the sixteenth century to publish the first printed edition of the Greek New Testament. These available manuscripts differed slightly from one another, were comparatively few in number, and the oldest among them dated back only to the tenth or eleventh centuries.

The competition growing among enterprising printers in that sixteenth century, only a few decades after the introduction of the concept of movable print into western Europe, led one of their number to prevail upon Erasmus to hasten the completion of this project of preparing a Greek text for publica-tion. Having at his disposal only one manuscript that contained the Book of Revelation, lacking completely the last six verses, Erasmus boldly translated those verses into Greek from his Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bible. In so doing, he introduced words into the Greek text that exist in no Greek manuscript. These words are still in the Textus Receptus, this so-called text received by all (Textus Receptus Omnibusalthough the by all has long since been dropped, never having been true), to which some ill-informed saints today give unquestioned alle-giance as if it had come directly from the fingers of God.

The honest reader deserves to know about this Erasmus. To Erasmusprince of sixteenth century humanists, scholar extraordinary, aloof from parti-san labels, from whom a letter would be prized, framed, and handed down as an heirloom, the darling of fawning princes and pedantsto him, I say, Christianity was a way of life, not dogma or creed. This attitude would make him the hero of modern theological pseudo-liberals who disdain doctrine as divisive, but embrace love as truth. Let there be no mistake here: correct doctrine is empty and sounding brass unless it is accompanied by consistent Christian behavior, but the latter is impossible without the former.

Erasmus is a far cry from his contemporary Martin Luther, who said, Cursed be that unity for which the Word of God must be put at stake. Erasmus abhorred any reformation that centered on doctrinal conviction and resulted in schism. He once declared, On no other account do I congratulate myself more than on the fact that I have never attached myself to any party. While suggesting privately that Luthers attacks were right, if too vehement, he never took sides with the Bible-centered reform against the pope-centered corruption. The whole public testimony of his life was in and with the greatest curse of so-called Christendom, the Roman Catholic Church.

By the seventeenth century in England there had been several translations made of the Bible. The English reign of the Scottish King James early in the century was the occasion for the request that a standard transla-tion, not theologically partisan nor re-flecting an interpretive bias, be prepared by the best and most pious scholars of the realms. This project was seriously, dutifully, and successfully undertaken,

47

producing the unparalleled King James Version, the so-called Authorized Version of the Bible, based essentially on the Received Text.

This noble labor has been the occasion for blessing to millions of English readers for more than three centuries. Although it was accepted slowly at first because of its novelty, generations have been reared on the beauty of its cadences. It has been a tool of instruction and education, of convic-tion and conversion. Its language has been memorized and quoted in litera-ture and in speech. Scores of great preachers have proclaimed its words as they have preached the Word. In its rhythms, its dignity, its simplicity; in the richness of its language; and in the directness of its tone, the King James Version is without peer and need fear no competition. None will ever take its place.

But no version is inspired, except to the degree that it conforms to the original meaning of the words of the original manuscripts. Fundamentalists have always contended this. In the series of publications known as The Fundamentals, early in the 1900s, the treatment of Inspiration of the Bible contains this sentence: The record for whose inspiration we contend is the original recordthe autographs or parchments of Moses, David, Daniel, Matthew, Peter, or Paul as the case may be and not any particular translation or translations of them whatever.

In the nineteenth century a second major text of the Greek New Testament was edited by two Anglican clergy-scholars, B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, using newly available manuscripts called those of the Alexandrian text. The importance of these was their antiquity; while the Received Text was derived from manuscripts of the late Middle

Ages, the Westcott-Hort Text was from those of the fourth century. More recently an older Greek manuscript portion, Chester Beatys P46, dated about A.D. 200, is of the same Alexandrian textonly about a century after John the Apostle wrote his Gospel.

The point here is that the older manuscripts are closer to the originals that the apostles wrote. Less time had passed since the original writing; the manuscripts had been copied fewer times, and, therefore, there had been fewer occasions for copyists mistakes to be introduced. All this would make for greater accuracy and a more faithful reproduction of the original in a text of the second or fourth century than in one of the tenth or twelfth. It is not the number of manuscripts that is the issue, but their antiquity.

Some sincere men today attempt to discredit the older, more accurate text because of the private correspondence of Dr. Hort, some of which reflects his speculations about certain doctrines. The assumption, quite correctly, is that an evil tree cannot bear good fruit. There are two problems here: deciding what is an evil tree and assuming that the fruit derives from the tree. The second of these is clearer: Westcott and Hort did not produce the fruit; they only compiled the text from the oldest known extant manuscripts. God gave the Word, not Westcott and Hort. No Greek manuscript of the New Testament is evil unless one has deliberately re-moved from it essential Christian doctrine that has been the consensus of believers for all the Christian centuries. To speak of the Greek New Testamenteither the Received Text or the Westcott-Hort Textas an evil thing is a strange kind of blasphemy against the Word of God, which God has exalted above His very name.

48

The second question regards the evil of the tree. It is natural to evaluate a dead mans position on matters spiritual by reference to his published works and his life associations. Westcott and Hort were Anglicans of the nineteenth century. As such, they believed some denomina-tional interpretations, like baptismal regeneration, which most of us would think wrong. But they were in the Protestant communion, which most of us would think far more nearly right than the Romanism of Erasmus. It is a strange matter indeed when some of todays Baptists, for example, are found applauding the work of a Romanist as divinely inspired, while spewing out the work of an Anglican Protestant as a satanic work. There are strange bed-fellows there.

While I have no brief for and see no need to defend Westcott and Hort, let us set the matter straight. The published works of a lifetime show these men to have been unjustly accused on the basis of youthful speculations. Westcott honored and defended the deity of Christ, His virgin birth, His bodily resurrection, His miracles, the virtue of His blood, and many other doctrines in many commentaries throughout his long and useful life. His works The Gospel According to St. John and The Epistle to the Hebrews are notable examples. Hort also defends the doctrine of the Trinity, the vicarious blood atonement, the equality of the Father and the Son, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ in his works The Apocalypse of St. John I-II and The First Epistle of St. Peter I:1-II:17. In the light of these teachings and the published positions of these men, it is not possible to call them unorthodox or theologically heretical.

A colleague has observed that the greatest American Greek scholar, A. T. Robertson, a strongly conservative Baptist, defended the Alexandrian (Westcott-Hort) text all his life. He noted that the next greatest American Greek scholar, J. Gresham Machen, a strongly conservative Presbyterian, famous for his classic defense of the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ, also defended the same text. These men, and others like them, living or dead, cannot be called liberals or unbelievers.

Neither the Received Text nor the Westcott-Hort Text is either right or wrong, liberal or conservative. The latter is older and nearer to the original, but both are the Word of the living God. The differences between them are more exaggerated than numerous. The por-tion of the Greek New Testament about which there is any substantial variation among the various manuscripts is only about one word in a thousand (a total of 1/2 page in a 500-page book). And no doctrine is affected by these variations; no doctrine is dependent on a single word in a single place. Where the word Christ may not be in one place in a manuscript, it is found in hundreds of other places. There are no significant variations in readings in any of the manuscripts for the vast majority of verses.

In addition to the recovery of older manuscripts since the Authorized Version was translated in 1611, there is the matter of changes in a living language over these centuries. While this is more a problem to the youth than to the more mature reader, there is still the natural desire of the layman for the Bible in his own, everyday, spoken language. This is what the King James Version was three and one-half centuries ago. Meanings and usages of some English words have changed since

49

then and some words and phrases seem archaic to the modern reader. Although very few of these are nevertheless unintelligible, there is the continuing attraction of modern speech versions. Also, the King James Version itself is not today the same as it was in 1611. Printers errors and revisions over the years have produced changes. A Dr. Paris of Cambridge in 1762 and a Dr. Blayney of Oxford in 1769 revised the spelling and grammar of the King James Version, resulting in over 70,000 details of difference from the 1611 edition. I have seen the number of changes in the Authorized Version over the years estimated at from three or four thousand to 75,000.

Here is the place for a very careful and necessary warning. It concerns the philosophy of translators. The desire for common language versions and the realization that even the standard version has gone through many altera-tions has resulted in a great number of modern versions. Very few of these are translations from the original languages. Many, like the New English Bible and the so-called Good News for Modern Man, are efforts at transforming general ideas into modern thought forms. They are to be rejected as human productions. Others, like the Phillipss version and Taylors Living Bible, are essentially paraphrases, not translations; these, too, are to be rejected as the word of men. Still others, like the Revised Standard Version of 1946 and 1952, were the works of theological liberals whose infidelity was most clearly shown in their watering down of messianic passages relating especially to the virgin birth of Christ; these are to be rejected as untrustworthy and perversions. Some, like the American Standard Version (1901), the Amplified Bible (sometimes more like a commentary than a transla-

tion), and the New American Standard Bible (1971), are efforts by conservative textual scholars at a faithful translation; these are useful and often helpful for study and clarification of meanings.

But not even these last few named conservative translations are likely in our lifetimeif everto supplant the revered King James Version of the Bible. Nor are they, strictly speaking, neces-sary. They are rather the results of the continuing desire of faithful textual scholars, devoted to the inerrant, infal-lible, inspired, preserved, and divinely transmitted Word of God, to make use of the results of the newest manuscript discoveries, the increased knowledge of the meanings of the koine1 Greek lan-guage, and to present the Bible in the language of today. Yet the gospel of Jesus Christ is crystal clear in any faithful translation of the Bible.

To say that any version of the Bible is specially inspired not only misses the meaning of inspiration (to holy men of old) but also raises simple questions of logic. Where was the inspired Bible before that particular version was produced? What about the Bible for the peopleGerman, French, and so onwho do not speak the language of that particular version? Have they (the majority of the worlds population) no access to the Word of God, except through a translation of that version? And is not that version itself only a translation from the original languages of Scripture?

Why, then, all the controversy today over Textus Receptus vs. Westcott-Hort? Why the creation of confusion among the people of God, very few of whom possess the equipment of scholarly expertise in the original languages to be the textual critics they must be to judge the validity of what a few sincere but misguided men are insisting? Why are

50

suspicions being raised and divisions being forced over matters relatively unimportant? Why not agree to reject paraphrases and perversions and let the faithful Word of God accomplish the purpose whereto the Lord sent it?

What reader does not, with the writer, believe that the King James Version, the Authorized Version of the Bible, is the Bible in English, par excellence, the noblest, the most quoted, the most forceful in its appeal to the heart, virtually the only version men have memorized, and that it will always be so? Who wouldwho could with any hearingdetract from its virtues? Who should fearwho, rather, should not welcomethe efforts of godly men to come even more closely to the original text because of the increasing embarrassment of riches of manu-scripts? Of what ancient classical work, of nearly the same antiquity, do we possess as much as one percent of the number of manuscripts that we do of the New Testament? There is none. Have not we ample reason to praise the God of heaven for His infinite power and goodness and wisdom in giving to man for all timeand for all eternitysuch a treasure?

Is there not compelling reason today to emphasize rather the authority of the Word of God? In a time when the leaders of Christendom are doing what is right in their own eyesshould we not call our brethren to obedience to the Word of the living God? Have not those who are today making a test of fellowship over one good New Testa-ment text vs. another good one not gone chasing a rabbit trail instead of the possum they are supposed to be hunting?

Let us read the Bible with blessing. Let us yield to the Bibles authority with submission. Let us obey the Bibles

commands with thanksgiving. Let us serve the Bibles Author with faith-fulness. God has given us His WordHe has set before us an abundant meal of sweet and delicious herbs; let us not be botanistslet us eat. Let us be able to say with Jeremiah, Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O Lord God of hosts (Jer. 15:16). 1Commonly spoken language of the first century, in which the New Testament manuscripts were written. Dr. Panosian served for fifty years as

professor of history and church history at Bob Jones University.

1979, Bob Jones University Press.

Reproduced by permission. Further reproduction prohibited.

51

APPENDIX B

LIGHT ON THE BIBLE TEXT DEBATE

BY THURMAN WISDOM, PH.D.

Controversies are inevitable among Christians. No doubt, some disputes are un-necessary, and some are clearly unpro-fitable. Nevertheless, they are inevitable, and it is our lot, as it was Jobs and Pauls, to seek for light in the midst of the heat. Unfortunately, thus far in the KJV contro-versy, there has been more heat than light, and confusion abounds.

The issue is confusing to many because of the nature of the research involved. Textual criticismthe examination and classification of ancient documentsis a highly specialized field that demands considerably more devotion than most people are willing to give it. Consequently, most Christians have very little knowledge of the textual procedures involved in deciphering and classifying the New Testament manuscripts. Yet, Gods people everywhere are being summoned to battle over these textual theories. It is imperative, therefore, that Christians become informed, at least of the major arguments and issues involved.

THE KJV GROUPS

Much of the confusion results from the fact that there are diverse sub-groups within the KJV position that often are not distinguished, particularly by opponents of the view.

The English Version Groups. A number of KJV advocates hold that the King James Version is an absolutely perfect translation. In fact, according to Peter Ruckman, the KJV is superior to the originals, for even the renderings that, strictly speaking, are inaccurate have turned out to be marvelous undesigned coincidences

which have slipped through the A. V. 1611 committees, unawares to them, and which give advanced light, and advanced revelation (Handbook of Manuscript Evi-dence, p. 127).

The same writer depicts the Holy Spirit not only as guiding the KJV translators word for word but also (in words generally reserved only for the originals) as writing the English words as well: The Holy Spirit, knowing that the greatest Imitator of God was Satan . . . wrote, be ye followers. If this is not the Greek text, the Greek text is wrong (Handbook, p. 136). The reference is to Ephesians 5:1, where the Received Text, the Westcott-Hort text, and every extant Greek manuscript has mimetai, imitators rather than akolouthountes, followers. Thus, the writer is saying either that Paul wrote the wrong word or that the word he wrote became wrong when the KJV was published.

This position is clearly the weakest of the three levels. It has been repudiated, in varying degrees, by most KJV advocates as well as by Westcott-Hort proponents. It demands a dogma of multiple inspiration: that God not only breathed His words infallibly through the original authors of Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16) but also repeated the process each time the Word of God was translated.

Furthermore, it ignores the fact that variations in wording have appeared in different editions of the King James Version. As late as the nineteenth century, the American Bible Society found some 24,000 variations in wording and punctuation in six editions of the KJV, and even today there are minor variations in spelling in

52

different editions of the Authorized Version (Jack P. Lewis, The English Bible from KJV to NIV, pp. 39-40). Of course, these insigni-ficant variants have not affected Bible believers in the slightest. The fact that God has allowed the variations to exist in the KJV and in all other translations should demonstrate that He has not made any one translation perfect in every detail.

The Received Text Group. Other KJV advocates hold that the King James trans-lation itself may not be verbally perfect, but the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts on which it is based contain no errors. There are variations of the spelling of words in the majority text or Textus Receptus, but there are no errors. If we allow one error, how do we know there are not others? (Thomas E. Baker, pamphlet, Will the True Fundamen-talist Please Stand Up?)

This view, though it is more reasonable than the preceding one, has some very serious problems. It is an undeniable fact that no two extant manuscripts of the Bible are exactly alike and, though the vast majority of the variations are inconse-quential, it simply is not true that only spelling variations appear.

Even editions of the Received Text have variations more substantial than spelling differences. Of the eighteen editions of the Textus Receptus published between 1516 and 1710, no two are exactly alike. Erasmuss first two editions did not contain I John 5:7. The text published by Stephanus, on which the King James Version is based, differed from the famous Textus Receptus edition of Elzevir in close to 300 places. Likewise, modern editions have variations: for example, Berrys widely recommended interlinear Received Text does not contain Luke 17:36.

The Majority Text Group. The Majority Text view is without question the most reasonable and viable of the KJV positions. Proponents in this camp hold that the readings found in the majority of the extant

Greek manuscripts, and/or those tradi-tionally accepted by Christians, are the true ones. In contrast with the other KJV theories, this view has won the support of a number of qualified conservative textual scholars.

The discussion that follows will concentrate on the Majority Text position as it compares with the Westcott-Hort theory.

THE CENTRAL ISSUE The key issue between Majority Text

and Westcott-Hort proponents concerns how much weight should be given to the manuscripts discovered or made available since the publishing of Erasmuss Textus Receptus.

Many of the more recently discovered manuscripts are several centuries older than the manuscripts of Erasmuss day. Westcott-Hort advocates hold that generally these older witnesses (the Alexandrian manuscripts) are the purest. They say that the manuscripts Erasmus used (the Byzantine) show signs of conflationswords or phrases added by scribes who, perhaps out of fear of omitting something, combined the readings of two variant manuscripts. For example, in Luke 24:53 some manuscripts read, praising God; others read, blessing God; and a number read, praising and blessing God. Westcott-Hort advocates would say that though the scribes may have had good intentions, nevertheless, they added to the Word of God, and we should utilize the light given by the oldest manuscripts to help us return to the precise wording of the originals.

Majority Text proponents repudiate this approach. They say that it is inconse-quential that the Alexandrian manuscripts are older. The Byzantine manuscripts are much more numerous, and the fact that they are so numerous indicates that they represent the true line of manuscripts accepted by Christians down through the

53

centuries. The Alexandrian manuscripts, they say, are representatives of a corrupt line of manuscripts that were set aside by true Christians.

Thus, in general, the Westcott-Hort proponents hold that the oldest manuscripts are the purest and that the later Byzantine manuscripts contain additions to the true Word of God. Majority Text advocates hold that the Byzantine manuscripts, as representatives of the majority, are the nearest to the originals, and the Alexandrian manuscripts contain deletions from the Word of God. Of course, this generalization is an oversimplification. In practice, Westcott-Hort advocates some-times evaluate later readings as more accurate than the older, and Majority Text defenders sometimes favor readings sup-ported by a minority of manuscripts.

THE FOCUS OF THE CONTROVERSY Scholars on both sides of the KJV

controversy acknowledge that there is no question at all about ninety percent of the readings in the manuscripts. They also agree that virtually all of the variations in manuscripts are inconsequentialconcern-ing such matters as spelling differences, word order, and obvious scribal blunders. In about two percent of the cases, there are variations involving the number of times theological terms and names appear in certain manuscripts. About a half dozen of the differences reflect substantial varia-tions involving whole verses.

Thus, the whole controversy is over variations in approximately two percent of the verses of the New Testament. It should be recognized that the differences in question are variations between orthodox manuscripts. Not one of the over five thousand manuscripts extant is unorthodox. The manuscripts differ in quality and neatness, and for the most part they differ slightly in the number of times certain words and phrases appear. However,

virtually any combination of manuscripts gives repeated and emphatic testimony of all of the truths of the Bible. Heretical mutilations of Scripture, such as that of Marcion (ca. A.D. 150), have existed in the past, but not one is extant today. So the question is not Which manuscripts are doctrinally orthodox? The question is Which manuscripts best accord with the originals and thus best reflect the doctrine of preservation?

THE ARGUMENTS Most of the arguments currently

circulating are attacks on or refutations of the Westcott-Hort theory. Therefore, I will simply summarize two of the most common KJV arguments and then present the Westcott-Hort defense. My object is not to convert anyone; it is simply to set before the reader the basic arguments of both sides. Space does not allow for a thorough presentation with detailed arguments, refutations, and counter-refutations.

A Providentially Approved Version. Majority Text advocates argue that God has put His seal of approval on the Textus Receptus for nearly 400 years. He has used the Received Text and the KJV exclusively to bring every modern revival for the past three centuries. It is inconceivable, they say, that God would now set aside the text He has so abundantly blessed.

However, the Septuagint was the received text of the Old Testament among Greek-speaking Jews and among Christians for several hundred yearseven though it departs from the Hebrew Masoretic (received) text in many places. In western Europe the Latin Vulgate was the received text for over one thousand years.

During these centuries, people spoke of the Septuagint and the Vulgate in much the same way as people speak of the King James Version today. Both translations were regarded as absolutely perfect. Irenaeus and other early church fathers held that the

54

Septuagint translators worked indepen-dently in isolated rooms, yet miraculously produced verbally identical translations. Augustine regarded the Septuagint as apostolically sanctioned and inspired, and he urged Jerome to translate the Old Testa-ment from it rather than from the Hebrew Masoretic Text (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, III, 975).

When the time came for a better translation to replace the venerable Vulgate, many regarded as heresy the implication that Jeromes translation might not be letter-perfect. The words of Erasmuss friend, Dorpius, are typical of the attitude of that day:

It is unreasonable to suppose that the universal Church has been in error for so many generations in her use of this edition; nor is it probable that so many holy Fathers have been mistaken, who in reliance upon it, have defined the most arduous questions in General Councils. (John A. Faulkner, Erasmus the Scholar, p. 127) A Question of Doctrinal Soundness. The

most serious charge leveled against the Westcott-Hort Greek text is that it undermines and even denies important biblical doctrines. The indictment focuses largely on instances in which such terms as blood, repentance, and Christ are omitted from the Westcott-Hort text. Several books and pamphlets on the subject suggest these omissions are the result of a conspiracy to undermine the great doctrines of the Faith. It is argued that Westcott and Hort themselves were rank heretics and that the Greek text they edited is the product of a heretical line of manuscripts.

Westcott-Hort proponents respond that the manuscripts they regard as best simply do not include all the theological terms in the same places as the Byzantine manu-scripts. It is not a question at all of deli-berate omissions, much less of a conspiracy. In any combination of manuscripts, even if

the worst were chosen by design, they would affirm again and again all the theo-logical concepts that are in the Received Text. Thus, if any of the manuscripts extant represent a conspiracy to undermine the deity of Christ or any of the great doctrines of the Faith, the conspirators were without question the most inept and incompetent who ever lived. Some modern translations do indeed undermine biblical doctrines, but this has resulted from prejudicial interpre-tation, not from corrupt manuscripts.

A LOST BIBLE? If the Christian cause hinges on the

universal acceptance of either the Westcott-Hort theory or the Majority Text theory, we are all in very serious trouble, for it would take a Protestant pope to settle the issue once and for all. There are outstanding scholars and men of unquestionable ortho-doxy on both sides of the issue. Neither side can claim a champion who knows enough about the facts of history and the mysteries of Providence to enable him to prove his theory conclusively.

Neither Westcott-Hort advocates nor Majority Text advocates can justly claim (as some have attempted) that their theory meets the stern requirements of such verses as Matthew 5:18, for the verse insists that not one jot or one tittle of the law shall pass away; whereas theorists in both camps freely acknowledge that even the manuscripts they judge to be the best have variations in themsome jots and tittles have passed away from all extant manu-scripts.

It must be remembered, however, that the Word of God existed before there were any physical manuscripts, and it will exist long after all manuscripts perish (Ps. 119:89; 2 Pet. 3:10-12). It cannot be bound geogra-phically, and it cannot be bound physically.

On one occasion the only extant manuscript of the words of Jeremiah the prophet was cut into pieces and cast into a

55

fire until all the roll was consumed (Jer. 36:23). Does that mean that a portion of the Word of God had perished? No. Jehoiakim did not destroy the Word of God, or any part of it, even for a moment. The words had gone forth from Jehovah, and they could not be bound by kings or armies or elements. If anything, Jehoiakims insolent action increased the revelation of Gods Word, for when the words of the destroyed scroll were rewritten, there were added besides unto them many like words (36:32).

But how can the average Christian, unequipped for Greek textual study, handle the question of which variationsor which theory concerning variationsis right? Basically, as he handles interpretational questions. For example, in Romans 5:1, some manuscripts support the KJV rendering, We have peace with God; others support the translation let us have peace with God. But even the words of the King James Version can be interpreted as including a let us exhortationthat Christians should enjoy peace with God (just as the words, we glory in tribulations, verse 3, include a tacit exhortation that we should glory in tribulations). Fundamentally, most of the manuscript variations amount to little more than interpretational questionsquestions concerning the emphases in the passage. Moreover, margi-nal references to manuscript variations need not be accepted any more than marginal interpretational notes. Every believer is a priest of God, and ultimately he alone is responsible for his reaction to the Word.

Every Christian is responsible, also, to maintain a humble, teachable spirit. All Christians cannot be manuscript experts. All are dependent to some extent on the gifts of others.

The greatest danger this controversy imposes upon us is that the focus on which theory best preserves the jots and tittles may blind us to the real message of the

Lord when He uttered the promise of Matthew 5:18. That message is found in the following verse: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. True orthodoxy consists not only in holding to the doctrine of verbal inspiration and preservation but also in obeying even the very least of the com-mandments of God.

Dr. Wisdom is Dean Emeritus of the School of Religion at Bob Jones University. 1984, Bob Jones University Press.

Reproduced by permission. Further reproduction prohibited.

Documents

Bi 401 Study Guide