Merry Ranzaa!

Over a recent lunch with some friends from CRBC we were discussing the dilemma as to what Reformed believers should do with Christmas. On one hand, we do not want to celebrate an unbiblical “holiday” but to keep our focus on the Lord’s Day as our only biblically sanctioned festival. On the other hand, we want to enjoy the positive aspects of the season as a cultural celebration.

We, therefore, decided that we should institute an alternative Reformed celebration that we have dubbed “Ranzaa” (Reformed Kwanzaa).

At Ranzaa time (Monday-Friday the week of the winter solstice, and never on Sunday) each Reformed family would set up five candles (representing the five points of Calvinism). Each night a new candle would be lit and the parents would teach the children about an individual aspect of the doctrines of grace (Children, tonight we light the total depravity candle….) and offer a biography of one of the Reformers (Children, tonight we learn about Melanchthon…).

Other suggested activities would include exchanging Reformed commentaries or Puritan paperbacks with family and friends, catechism quizzing with the kids, giving bouquets of tulips to the ladies, and Ranzaa caroling (“A Might Fortress is our God,” “How Sad our State by Nature Is,” etc.).

We think this could catch on….

JTR

Textual Note: "Beor" or "Bosor" in 2 Peter 2:15?

The issue: Is Balaam the son of Beor or Bosor?

External evidence:

Bosor is the traditional reading and is supported by almost all ancient manuscripts and versions. The reading Beor is found in Vaticanus. The original hand of Sinaiticus has the conflated reading Beo-orsor.

Internal evidence:

One would have expected to see Balaam described as “son of Beor” as he is in Numbers 22:5; 24:3, 15. Why then do we have the dominant reading of Bosor? Some hold that Peter made a mistake here, but Tom Schreiner points out that “the word ‘Bosor’ likely derives from a pun on the word ‘flesh’ (basar) in Hebrew” (1, 2 Peter, Jude, p. 354). Though Schreiner rarely supports the traditional text, in this case he favors Bosor.

Translation choices:

Though both the traditional text and modern critical Greek text read “Bosor,” many modern translations ignore the textual evidence and read “Beor” (so NIV, NASB, ESV). The dominant reading is retained by the KJV, NRSV, and HCSB. Oddly enough, this is one point where the NKJV departs from both the traditional text and the KJV by reading “Beor.”

JTR

Bandwagon and Exigency Fallacies

I ran across a series of videos that teach basic logical fallacies.  Here's the video that outlines "bandwagon" and "exigency" fallacies, typified by a mindset that says, "You should hurry up and join us in this because everybody's doing it!":

Bunyan's "The Holy War": Mr. Conscience

In Bunyan’s The Holy War, Emmanuel appoints two ministers over Mansoul. The first is the Lord Chief Secretary (the Holy Spirit) and the second is “the old gentleman who before had been the recorder of Mansoul, Mr. Conscience by name.” This part of the allegory can be taken on at least two levels. On one hand Bunyan describes the individual believer guided by the indwelling Holy Spirit of God and an awakened conscience. On the other hand, there is much in the description of the Recorder that resembles the role of a minister among God’s people. Indeed, he serves as the congregation’s conscience. Here is Bunyan’s description of the charge given to the recorder:

Then did the Prince call unto him the old gentleman, who before had been the Recorder of Mansoul, Mr. Conscience by name, and told him, That, forasmuch as he was well skilled in the law and government of the town of Mansoul, and was also well-spoken, and could pertinently deliver to them his Master's will in all terrene and domestic matters, therefore he would also make him a minister for, in, and to the goodly town of Mansoul, in all the laws, statutes, and judgments of the famous town of Mansoul. 'And thou must,' said the Prince, 'confine thyself to the teaching of moral virtues, to civil and natural duties; but thou must not attempt to presume to be a revealer of those high and supernatural mysteries that are kept close in the bosom of Shaddai, my Father: for those things knows no man, nor can any reveal them but my Father's Secretary only.

'Thou art a native of the town of Mansoul, but the Lord Secretary is a native with my Father; wherefore, as thou hast knowledge of the laws and customs of the corporation, so he of the things and will of my Father.

'Wherefore, O Mr. Conscience, although I have made thee a minister and a preacher to the town of Mansoul, yet as to the things which the Lord Secretary knoweth, and shall teach to this people, there thou must be his scholar and a learner, even as the rest of Mansoul are.

'Thou must therefore, in all high and supernatural things, go to him for information and knowledge; for though there be a spirit in man, this person's inspiration must give him understanding. Wherefore, O thou Mr. Recorder, keep low and be humble, and remember that the Diabolonians that kept not their first charge, but left their own standing, are now made prisoners in the pit. Be therefore content with thy station.

'I have made thee my Father's vicegerent on earth, in such things of which I have made mention before: and thou, take thou power to teach them to Mansoul, yea, and to impose them with whips and chastisements, if they shall not willingly hearken to do thy commandments.

'And, Mr. Recorder, because thou art old, and through many abuses made feeble; therefore I give thee leave and license to go when thou wilt to my fountain, my conduit, and there to drink freely of the blood of my grape, for my conduit doth always run wine. Thus doing, thou shalt drive from thine heart and stomach all foul, gross, and hurtful humours. It will also lighten thine eyes, and will strengthen thy memory for the reception and keeping of all that the King's most noble Secretary teacheth.'

JTR

The Vision (12/2/10): Bigger Than We Knew

The Associated Press published an online article this week which reported that scientists have discovered that there are billions more stars in the universe than previously believed to exist. The article reports:

A new study suggests there are a mind-blowing 300 sextillion of them, or three times as many as scientists previously calculated. That is a 3 followed by 23 zeros. Or 3 trillion times 100 billion.

The estimate, contained in a study published online Wednesday [12.1.10] in the journal Nature, is based on findings that there are many more red dwarf stars — the most common star in the universe — than once thought.

The recalculation came after astronomers discovered that elliptical shaped galaxies held far more red dwarf stars than previously realized. Former calculations were based on estimates made from study of our own spiral shaped galaxy, the Milky Way, and were extrapolated to the study of other galaxies. Scientists estimate that there are 100 billion to a trillion galaxies in the universe and that each galaxy holds about 100 billion to a trillion stars. They now say that about a third of the galaxies are elliptical rather than spiral.

What do we learn from this? For one thing, we learn that all “scientific” knowledge is tentative. What one generation holds as indisputable scientific truth can be changed in the next. More importantly, we learn that this cosmos is bigger than we knew. From a theological perspective, we should be even more in awe of our Creator.

David’s words in Psalm 8 hold even more weight than we previously realized:

3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

Thus, we are driven to even greater amazement and admiration at the Incarnation that “the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” (John 14:6).

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

CRBC Sermons December 2010

Note: We begin two new sermon series this month at CRBC. On Sunday mornings we will begin a series through 1 Samuel that will begin with a study of the life of Samuel (1 Samuel chapters 1-7). In the afternoon service we will begin a series of communion meditations on the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12).

December 5

AM The Birth of Samuel (1 Samuel 1)

PM The Beatitudes: Introduction (Matthew 5:1-12)

December 12

AM Hannah’s Prayer (1 Samuel 2:1-11)


PM Blessed are the poor in spirit (Matthew 5:1-12)

December 19

AM The Faithful Priest (1 Samuel 2:12-36)

PM Blessed are those who mourn (Matthew 5:1-12)

December 26

AM Let him do what seems good to Him (1 Samuel 3)

PM Blessed are the meek (Matthew 5:1-12)

Bunyan's "The Holy War": The Lord Chief Secretary

Over Thanksgiving, I was reading John Bunyan’s “other” allegory, The Holy War (first published 1682). I was struck by the scene in which Emmanuel establishes a ministry among the citizens of Mansoul. Over this task he appoints two persons. The first is “the Lord Chief Secretary” (the Holy Spirit) and the second is “the old gentleman, who before had been the recorder of Mansoul, Mr. Conscience by name.” Here is Bunyan’s descrition of the proper role of the Lord High Secretary in Mansoul:

When this was over, the Prince sent again for the elders of the town of Mansoul, and communed with them about a ministry that he intended to establish among them; such a ministry that might open unto them, and that might instruct them in the things that did concern their present and future state.

'For,' said he, 'you, of yourselves, unless you have teachers and guides, will not be able to know, and, if not to know, to be sure not to do the will of my Father.'

At this news, when the elders of Mansoul brought it to the people, the whole town came running together, (for it pleased them well, as whatever the Prince now did pleased the people,) and all with one consent implored his Majesty that he would forthwith establish such a ministry among them as might teach them both law and judgment, statute and commandment; that they might be documented in all good and wholesome things. So he told them that he would grant them their requests, and would establish two among them; one that was of his Father's court, and one that was a native of Mansoul.

'He that is from the court,' said he, 'is a person of no less quality and dignity than my Father and I; and he is the Lord Chief Secretary of my Father's house: for he is, and always has been, the chief dictator of all my Father's laws, a person altogether well skilled in all mysteries, and knowledge of mysteries, as is my Father, or as myself is. Indeed he is one with us in nature, and also as to loving of, and being faithful to, and in the eternal concerns of the town of Mansoul.

'And this is he,' said the Prince, 'that must be your chief teacher; for it is he, and he only, that can teach you clearly in all high and supernatural things. He, and he only, it is that knows the ways and methods of my Father at court, nor can any like him show how the heart of my Father is at all times, in all things, upon all occasions, towards Mansoul; for as no man knows the things of a man but that spirit of a man which is in him, so the things of my Father knows no man but this his high and mighty Secretary. Nor can any, as he, tell Mansoul how and what they shall do to keep themselves in the love of my Father. He also it is that can bring lost things to your remembrance, and that can tell you things to come. This teacher, therefore, must of necessity have the pre-eminence, both in your affections and judgment, before your other teacher; his personal dignity, the excellency of his teaching, also the great dexterity that he hath to help you to make and draw up petitions to my Father for your help, and to his pleasing, must lay obligations upon you to love him, fear him, and to take heed that you grieve him not.

'This person can put life and vigour into all he says; yea, and can also put it into your heart. This person can make seers of you, and can make you tell what shall be hereafter. By this person you must frame all your petitions to my Father and me; and without his advice and counsel first obtained, let nothing enter into the town or castle of Mansoul, for that may disgust and grieve this noble person.

'Take heed, I say, that you do not grieve this minister; for if you do, he may fight against you; and should he once be moved by you to set himself against you in battle array, that will distress you more than if twelve legions should from my Father's court be sent to make war upon you.

'But, as I said, if you shall hearken unto him, and shall love him; if you shall devote yourselves to his teaching, and shall seek to have converse, and to maintain communion with him, you shall find him ten times better than is the whole world to any; yea, he will shed abroad the love of my Father in your hearts, and Mansoul will be the wisest, and most blessed of all people.'

JTR

Video of the Week: "Messiah" in the Food Court

Textual Notes: 2 Peter 2:13

Image:  Ancient Syriac Bible

Two issues in 2 Peter 2:13:

a. Should the verb read “to suffer wrong” (adikeo) or “to receive” (komioumai)?

External evidence:

The traditional reading is “to receive.” It is supported by the corrected hand of Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and the majority of minuscules. The alternative reading is found in the original hand of Sinaiticus and in p72.

Internal evidence:

The adikeo reading “involves a very rare construction with misthon” (Textual Commentary, p. 703). Metzger speculates, thus, that the copyists introduced the “less objectionable” reading. Another possibility, however, is that a copyist tried to introduce a verb that made a play on words with adikias.

Translation choices:

Translations based on traditional texts:

“And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness” (AV);

“and will receive the wages of unrighteousness” (NKJV).

Translations based on modern critical text:

“They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done” (NIV);

“suffering wrong as the wages of doing wrong” (NASB);

“suffering wrong as the wage for their wrongdoing” (ESV).

b. Should the reading be en tais apatais auton (“in their own deceiving”) or en tais agapais auton (“in their own love feasts”)?

External evidence:

The traditional reading (apatais, “deceivings”) is supported by p72, Sinaiticus, the original hand of Alexandrinus, and the vast majority of Greek manuscripts. The alternative (agapais, “love feasts”), however, appears in the corrected hand of Alexandrinus and Vaticanus. This provides yet another example where Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not agree.

Internal evidence:

The primary question here is whether a scribe attempted to harmonize this verse with Jude 1:12 (en tais agapais humon). The modern critical text retains the traditional reading but only gives it a “C” reading. Metzger states the majority of the UBS committee “was of the opinion that the author of 2 Peter consciously altered Jude’s expression, substituting (as he does elsewhere) a more generalized expression.” He concludes that the agapais reading “is then a scribal assimilation to the prevailing text of Jude” (Textual Commentary, p. 704).

Translation choices:

Modern English translations follow the traditional text. Examples:

NIV: “in their pleasures”

NASB: “in their deceptions”

ESV: “in their deceptions”

Dabney on the importance of creeds

Why should we make use of clear creeds and confessions?  Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-1898) made these remarks when critiquing the anti-creedal views of Alexander Campbell:

As man’s mind is notoriously fallible, and professed Christians who claim to hold to the Scriptures, as they understand them, differ from each other notoriously, some platform for union or cooperation must be adopted, by which those who believe they are truly agreed may stand and work together.  It is the only possible expedient, in the absence of an inspired living umpire, such as the pope claims falsely to be, by which fidelity to truth can be reconciled with cooperation.  A creed, then, is such a means for enabling Christians to understand each other.  It is the human exposition of what is supposed to be the exact meaning of the Scriptures; and differs from those usually delivered from the pulpit only in being more carefully and accurately made by the assistance of many minds.  Its setting forth is an exercise of the church’s ordinary didactic function. It must advance nothing which its compilers do not suppose to be fully sustained by the Scriptures; and no authority is claimed for it, in any respect, save that which they believe is communicated by the word of God.

From Robert Lewis Dabney, “The System of Alexander Campbell:  An Examination of Its Leading Points” [first published in the Southern Presbyterian Review (July, 1880)], in Dabney’s Discussions, Vol. I (Sprinkle Publications, 1992):  p. 315.

Is there really a "Reformed Resurgence" underway?

Is there really a "Reformed Resurgence" underway?  There has been a considerable amount of buzz online over a recent Barna report which challenges the notion that we are, in fact, seeing an actual resurgence of interest in reformed theology and practice in American churches, despite the rise of neo-Calvinistic celebrity speakers, books and conferences.

Justin Taylor discounts the reliability of the study.

R. Scott Clark offered his thoughts, suggesting the "noise" might be the result of the "re-emergence of predestinarians among Southern Baptists." He also suggests that there might be parallels with the first Great Awakening which some argue offered "more noise than statistical substance."

Daryl Hart has also chimed in on the subject, *modestly* suggesting that the sociologists have only supplied statistics for "what we already knew."  Hart concludes:  "...we were not that hopeful for a movement led by the likes of John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and C. J. Mahaney. These men all have their virtues (and their vices), but when Calvinism depends on Baptists and charismatics it is hard to think that Reformed Protestantism is surging."  As usual, Hart does not  pay much attention to the distinction between Reformed Baptists and Neo-Calvinistic Baptists like Piper, et al.

JTR 

The Vision (11/25/10): The Bible and Personal Prayer: Part 3 of 3

Note: In view of the Thanksgiving holiday, the Vision is being posted a day early this week.  The following devotional article is the third in a three part series written by CRBC’s Michael Cressin.

Now I would like to consider that part of Scripture which I believe to be the real key to using the Bible in personal prayer: the Book of Psalms. These 150 “prayer-songs” (the word “psalms” means songs) have been used for centuries by Christians as the underlying basis for their prayer lives. The Psalter is truly the “prayer-book of the Bible”. These ancient prayers of Israel have been devoutly prayed by the church, both corporately and privately, since its inception. The Psalms convey the entire gamut of human emotions and contain the entire range of God-man relations. From utter despair to exuberant joy, from sorrowful repentance to jubilant praise and thanksgiving, the Psalms resonate within the believer's soul and propel him God-ward.

Martin Luther called the Psalms “a little Bible, and the summary of the Old Testament.” He viewed them as a meditation on the message and significance of Jesus Christ. In the Reformed tradition, the Psalms have been sung metrically ever since the Reformation. In the Anglican tradition the Psalms have been a significant part of worship, always included in the Book of Common Prayer and utilized regularly in public worship.

I have personally found the Psalms to be particularly helpful in initiating personal prayer time. Often we come to prayer and are not feeling spiritually inclined. I have found that beginning with a Psalm or several Psalms can help settle my mind and direct me towards God. Usually, I will pray through the Psalter consecutively over the course of several weeks and then begin it again. Another suggestion is to choose one or two meaningful Psalms and use these at every prayer period as opening prayers. Psalms 1, 51, 95, or 100 are some recommended possibilities here. If one focuses one's mind on the words of the Psalms and they enter one's heart they will serve to direct him God-ward. Reading a Psalm with some other Scripture, taking time for reflection, and then offering spontaneous prayer is a time-honored format. One could also utilize a Psalm as a concluding prayer.

Again, I must emphasize that it is the Holy Spirit who helps us to pray. (Rom 8:26). The Spirit searches the deep things of God (1 Cor 2:10) and teaches us spiritual things (1 Cor 2:13). We must ask the Holy Spirit to come to our aid to help us pray with the Word of God. The Word and the Spirit belong inseparably together. As John Calvin taught, “The Word is the instrument by which the Lord dispenses the illumination of His Spirit to believers” (Institutes I: 9:3). This is an experiential reality which is meant to be shared by all Christians in prayer. Once we begin to experience authentic prayer God will indeed bless us with growth in knowledge of Him and His ways.

Michael Cressin

Three Basic Challenges to the ESV

Crossway publishers continue their very successful (dare we say relentless) marketing of the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible. Justin Taylor, a Crossway editor, recently featured a new video on his blog in which “various leaders” explain “why they trust and appreciate this translation.” The ESV is, without doubt, the translation of choice among those whom Colin Hansen has described as the “young, restless, and reformed.” Questions about the ESV are rarely heard in the neo-evangelical Calvinistic movement which Daryl Hart has described as possessing "an extremely chummy atmosphere" (see his article here).

Here, however, are three basic challenges that might give one pause before jumping on the ESV bandwagon (you can also listen to an audio version here or view a pdf version here):

1. The ESV has a National Council of Churches copyright.

If you turn in a copy of the ESV to the bottom of the copyright page, you will find this note:

“The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (ESV) is adapted from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. All rights reserved.”

The note, granted, is a bit ambiguous. Does it mean that the ultra-liberal National Council of Churches holds the copyright to the RSV, upon which the ESV is based, or does it mean that the NCC retains, as well, some rights to the ESV? What agreement did Crossway reach with the NCC in order to revise the RSV and create the ESV? Did they pay them a one-time fee? Or, does the NCC receive ongoing royalties from sales of the ESV? On this point Alan J. Macgregor queries:

Does this mean that every time a believer purchases an ESV Bible, he is financially supporting the National Council of Churches? (That body denies most of the fundamental doctrines of the Evangelical Reformed Faith). There are still many professing Evangelical and Reformed groups and publications, all enthusiastically encouraging us to buy and use this new version. The separation principles commanded in the Scriptures, and which our discerning forefathers solemnly held to, seem to have been discarded and forgotten (Three Modern Versions: A Critical Assessment of the NIV, ESV, and NKJV [The Bible League, 2004]: p. 50).

Even if there is some contractual arrangement whereby the NCC received an upfront lump payment and does not receive royalties for individual ESV sales, the challenges below remain.

2. The ESV is not, in fact, a new translation but an evangelical revision of a notoriously liberal translation.

A close inspection of the preface to the ESV is revealing. Though it claims to stand “in the classic mainstream of English Bible translations,” it is clear that the ESV actually issues from a far more liberal source. On one hand, the ESV wants to claim a place in the tradition of the classic English translations of the Protestant Reformation, but, on the other, it must admit that its roots are actually in later Protestant liberalism. Again, the preface captures the ESV’s awkward stance: “The words and phrases themselves grow out of the Tyndale-King James legacy, and most recently out of the RSV, with the 1971 RSV text providing the starting point for our work.” So, in truth, the ESV’s lineage is through the infamous English Revised Version of 1885, the American Standard Version of 1901, and the Revised Standard Version of 1952 and 1971.

The old RSV was roundly condemned by evangelicals when it first appeared. The most criticized passage was Isaiah 7:14 in which the RSV translated the Hebrew word almah as “young woman” rather than “virgin.” Conservatives, no doubt rightly, took this as a not so subtle undermining of the doctrine of the virginal conception of Christ. When the NT portion of the RSV was completed in 1946, Westminster Theological Seminary professor Oswald T. Allis wrote a stinging critique of the work titled Revision or New Translation? (P & R, 1948).

Granted, the ESV has corrected passages like Isaiah 7:14 (i.e., it reads “virgin” and not “young woman”). Still, the fact that the ESV springs from the RSV cannot be an irrelevant consideration. If one compares the ESV and RSV, he finds that the translations are very often is full agreement with one another. Some have suggested that despite corrections like that made with Isaiah 7:14, the ESV still retains some doctrinally questionable renderings from the RSV. Alan J. Macgregor cites the following passages as examples: Micah 5:2; Isaiah 53:9; 1 Corinthians 3:3-4; 1 Corinthians 7:36-38; Philippians 2:6; 1 Timothy 1:12; Hebrews 13:24; 2 Thessalonians 3:6; and Revelation 19:8) (see Macgregor’s Three Modern Versions, pp. 55-58). Let’s take Micah 5:2 as an example:

KJV: But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

RSV: But you, O Bethlehem Eph’rathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from old, from ancient days.

ESV: But you, O Bethlehem Eph’rathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from old, from ancient days.

Note that the ESV follows the RSV verbatim except for the insertion of the word “too.” The doctrinal issue here would have to do with the change of “from everlasting” to “from ancient days.” Macgregor concludes, “the liberal rendering of the RSV is retained in full, so undermining the Deity of Christ, reducing Him to a created being who has a point of origin!” (Three Modern Versions, p. 56).

There are other issues related to the ESV’s general translation philosophy which Macgregor pinpoints. Despite the fact that it is championed by gender complementarians, “it appears that concession is sometimes made to the gender neutral lobby” (Macgregor, p. 54). Oddly enough, some of the old RSV’s gender specific renderings (composed before the ascendency of academic feminism) are made gender neutral in the ESV. Here are three examples from Romans (emphasis added):

Romans 2:28:

RSV: “For he is not a real Jew….”

ESV: “For no one is a Jew….”

Romans 3:4:

RSV: “…Let God be true though every man be false….”

ESV: “…Let God be true though every one were a liar….”

Romans 3:28:

RSV: “For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the law.”

ESV: “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.”

Finally, despite its claim in the preface to be an “essentially literal” translation, the ESV often makes use of dynamic equivalent methods, as does the RSV. One example cited by Macgregor is the rendering of the phrase en te paliggenesia (literally “in the regeneration”) in Matthew 19:28 as “in the new world” (though a note in the ESV provides the literal rendering).

3. The ESV is based on the modern critical Greek text.

The final challenge comes in the fact that the ESV is not based on the traditional texts of Scripture that were used by the Protestant Reformers in their vernacular translations (the Masoretic text of the OT and the received text of the NT). For the NT, most significantly, the ESV is based on the modern critical Greek text as found in the UBS 4th ed. and the Nestle-Aland 27th ed.

This means that as one reads through the ESV he will find translations based on texts that diverge from the Tyndale-Geneva-King James Version tradition.

Examples:

Though the primary textual issues relate to the NT, here is one example from the OT:

In Psalm 145:13 the ESV includes a bracketed half verse in the text that the footnote explains “is supplied by one Hebrew manuscript, Septuagint, Syriac (compare Dead Sea Scroll).”

The others are from the NT:

The ending of Mark’s Gospel (16:9-20) is included in double brackets after an inserted note which reads: “[SOME OF THE EARLIEST MANUSCRIPTS DO NOT INCLUDE 16:9-20].”

The pericope adulterae (John 7:53-8:11), likewise, appears in double brackets with a similar introductory note inserted into the body of the text.

Philip’s confession in Acts 8:37 is removed from the text proper and relegated to a footnote.

Though these departures from the traditional text ought to raise considerable alarm, the more fundamental worry is the basic fact that the ESV is based on the modern critical Greek text. This means that one day a new critical text will be produced (UBS 5th ed./Nestle-Aland 28th ed.) by the secular academy. This means that eventually there will also be, in all likelihood, a NESV (New English Standard Version) or perhaps RESV (Revised English Standard Version) placed on the market. Who knows what decisions future editors of this Bible will make? Perhaps, for example, in future editions Mark 16:9-20 will be exiled to the footnotes! Translations joined to the modern academy must, of necessity, be unstable.

Conclusion:

Let’s leave the final word to Alan J. Macgregor:

Despite all the hype and glowing statements about the ESV, it fails to deliver on its promises. It is in reality nothing more than a very mild revision of a very liberal Bible version. While there are some pleasing improvements over the RSV, not all the changes are for the better. By using the RSV, as their reference point, the translators have started in the wrong place. The leaven of liberalism is still there. The conclusion of the matter must be that it is “weighed in the balances and found wanting” (Three Modern Versions, p. 59).

JTR

David Sandeman: "I am head-to-foot righteousness"

In yesterday's message we reflected on 2 Peter 3:13:  "Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells."

What is meant here by "righteousness"?  It could refer (1) to God the Father; (2) to Christ; or (3) to the saints (those made righteous or justified by faith, Rom 5:1).  

David Sandeman (1826-1858) was a Scottish missionary to China who became sick with cholera and died at the age of 32 years.  As he lay dying, a friend asked how he was doing.  He answered, "I am head-to-foot righteousness" (as cited in Iain Murray, The Old Evangelicalism, p. 73).     

Spurgeon on the Vagaries of Emotionalism

I’ve been reading Iain Murray’s excellent book The Old Evangelicalism: Old Truths for a New Awakening (Banner, 2005) this week.

In a chapter titled “Spurgeon and True Conversion,” Murray shares this Spurgeon anecdote on the vagaries of emotionalism:

A young preacher once remarked, “Were you not greatly struck to see so large a congregation weeping?” “Yes,” said his judicious friend, “but I was more struck with the reflection that they would probably have wept more at a play” (p. 52).

I shared this quote with a friend this week, and he told about a conversation he had with someone arguing for the priority of music over preaching in worship. His conversation partner noted in advocacy for the power of music that when he sang certain songs in worship his eyes always filled with tears. My friend replied, “Yes, but remember that unconverted men cried after 9/11 when they heard ‘Amazing Grace.’”

JTR

Spurgeon: "Condemned" or "Forgiven"?

Last Sunday (11/14) I had the privilege of preaching the classic text from 2 Peter 3:9 which describes the Lord as "not willing that any should perish" (listen to the audio here).  Here is the manuscript version of the conclusion with an anecdote taken from Spurgeon:

The great preacher Charles Spurgeon at various times in his preaching ministry asked his hearers to go home after the service and to spend a bit of time, quietly alone, honestly considering their spiritual condition in God’s sight. Then he asked them to take a slip of paper and a pencil or pen and to write one of two words. If they felt they were not believers he asked them to write the word “condemned.” And if they felt they were believers, trusting in Christ alone for salvation, he asked them to write the word “forgiven.”

Several were brought to Christ by this means.

One young man went home and wrote “condemned.” But when he looked at his own writing, the tears began to flow, his heart began to break, and, before long, he fled to Christ, threw the paper in the fire and took a new one and on it wrote “forgiven.”

In another case, a man had been in the service with his family. When they got home the man told his wife he was going to take the paper and write “condemned.” His wife pleaded with him, but he took the paper and pen and began to write the letter “c.” Just then, his daughter, a little Christian girl, caught hold of his hand and said, “No, father, you shall not write it.” Spurgeon concludes, “and by the entreaties of his wife and child, the man was brought to the Saviour, and afterwards became a member with them at the Tabernacle” (see Autobiography, Vol. 2, p. 241).

If I were to ask you today to go home and do the same, what would you write? Would you write “condemned” or would you write “forgiven”?

JTR

The Vision (11/18/10): Reflections on the Bible and Personal Prayer: Part 2 of 3

Note: The following devotional article is the second in a three part series written by CRBC’s Michael Cressin.

Often the amount of time that we can devote to a prayer period determines the amount of Scripture that will be appropriate for that period. Two concepts are applicable here: macro-scriptura and micro-scriptura. Macro-scriptura denotes using a lot of scripture while micro-scriptura means using a small amount of scripture. Let's say that one has plenty of time on hand to commit to prayer. Perhaps it is the Lord's Day, and one is setting aside an hour or more for prayer. Or maybe it's a week-day evening with a free half hour or forty minutes available. These would be optimal for reading and meditating upon a longer passage of Scripture, perhaps several chapters. This would be a good time to dig into some of those lengthy Old Testament passages from the history of Israel or the prophets. Here in the macro-scriptura mode one can allow one's mind to be molded by the flow of the biblical narrative. Perhaps in the midst of our reading a few verses pop out to touch your heart. Slow down and re-read that verse that caught your attention. At the end of the entire passage come back to that verse and savor it. Allow it to sink into your soul. You might even want to write it down and refer to it later that day.

I try daily to have a period of macro-scriptural prayer. Usually the evening is best for me. I typically go consecutively through a book of the Bible. Often I will jot down “power verses” so that when I finish the course of that particular book I will have a collection of verses from that book that I can review and meditate upon. You must realize that, “the Word of God is living and powerful, sharper than any two edge sword” (Heb 4:12). Often with these treasured “power verses” I find that I experience the life-transforming power of the Scriptures.

The other mode of scriptural prayer is that of micro-scriptura. Here, as stated above, a smaller portion of the Bible is utilized. Perhaps one only has 10-20 minutes to commit to prayer. It is times like these that perhaps a section of one of the Gospels or New Testament epistles will seem more optimal for use in prayer. Let the Word speak to you. Let it sink into your mind and your heart. Read it over again...and again. During the course of your day bring it to mind. What prayer does the passage prompt within you? Perhaps the passage makes you aware of your own sinfulness, or more aware of God's providential care for you, or maybe it prompts you simply to praise God for who He is and what He has done. A little bit of Scripture can certainly go a long way! Concentrated prayer on a few verses can yield much fruit.

Another important consideration is the relationship between corporate worship and personal prayer time. It is a centuries-old proven fact that without commitment to a church body one will not grow in the Christian life. This is certainly true when it comes to personal prayer. On any given Lord's Day in the church assembly we are exposed to biblical readings, psalms, scripturally-based hymns, and Bible-centered preaching. All or any of these can provide texts for prayerful consideration during the week to follow. A practice that I sometimes like to incorporate into my personal prayer is to reflect upon the scriptural passage upon which the Lord's Day sermon was based. I will often do this in the first half of the following week. In the latter half of that week I will often preview the sermon text for the coming Lord's Day. I have found much can be gained from this practice, including a greater sense of commitment to the church body.

Michael Cressin

Four in ten say marriage is becoming obsolete

An AP article yesterday titled "Four in 10 say marriage is becoming obsolete" reports troubling cultural trends in the US relating to marriage and family.  The article reads in part:

About 29 percent of children under 18 now live with a parent or parents who are unwed or no longer married, a fivefold increase from 1960, according to the Pew report being released Thursday. Broken down further, about 15 percent have parents who are divorced or separated and 14 percent who were never married. Within those two groups, a sizable chunk — 6 percent — have parents who are live-in couples who opted to raise kids together without getting married.

Indeed, about 39 percent of Americans said marriage was becoming obsolete. And that sentiment follows U.S. census data released in September that showed marriages hit an all-time low of 52 percent for adults 18 and over.

This is the context in which the contemporary church must minister the Word.

JTR

Sermon of the Week: Maurice Roberts on "Avoiding Current Errors in Evangelicalism"

Pastor Maurice Roberts preached this message titled, "Avoiding Current Errors in Evangelicalism" (2 Tim 4:3, 4).  In the message he addresses the following five errors:

1.  The New Perspective on Paul.
2.  The place of the Ten Commandments in the believer's life.
3.  The Federal Vision teaching.
4.  The "Open View" of God.
5.  Conditional Immortatlity.

Textual Note: 2 Peter 2:11

The issue here is the case of the noun in the phrase “before the Lord.” Should it be dative (kurio) or genitive (kuriou)?

External evidence:

The traditional reading is the dative. The reading is supported by the modern critical heavyweights, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. It is also supported by Alexandrinus, though it omits the preposition. The genitive reading, however, is supported by p72.

Internal evidence:

The modern critical text follows the genitive as “the more difficult reading” (Textual Commentary, p. 703). Metzger adds a minority report since his view apparently conflicted with the majority. He suspects that the prepositional phrase was not original but added either in the form para kurio or para kuriou. He notes that in the NT para takes the genitive 78 times, the dative 50 times, and the accusative 60 times. If the phrase is included at all, Metzger argues that it ought to follow “the great uncials” but be enclosed in square brackets.

Translation choices:

All major translations include the prepositional phrase as “before the Lord” (AV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV). The English rendering does not indicate which text is followed. Again, this is an interesting case where the “great uncials” support the antiquity of the traditional reading.

JTR