Thursday 28 June 2007

Can a Bad Person Translate the Good Book?

In the April to June 2007 issue of the “Quarterly Record”, the official magazine of the Trinitarian Bible Society, there is an ad hominem attack on the textual critic Dr. Kurt Aland. Aland was largely responsible for compiling and editing the Nestle-Aland Greek 26th edition and the UBS 1966 and 1983 Greek texts of the New Testament and which differ from the traditional “Received Text.” The UBS and the Nestle-Aland form the basis of most modern translations of the New Testament while the Received Text or Textus Receptus forms the basis of the Authorized or King James Version (along with the New King James Version) of the New Testament.

The stated purpose of the author of the article is to show “…what Kurt Aland’s theological views are concerning Biblical inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility.” He uses the published opinions of Aland to “prove” that Aland’s work is unreliable at best and heretical at worst. He does this entirely through the use of the ad hominem fallacy by confusing the issue of biblical inerrancy and so on with irrelevant premises about Dr. Aland and his beliefs. I say irrelevant because I believe it is not important to God what are the personal beliefs or practices of men and women he chooses to carry out His work or His will. Modern Christians have the false idea that because God is good, He would only use good people to further His designs and good purposes. Many Christians, including the author of the article in the “Quarterly Record”, forget that God has often used “questionable” and even down-right bad people to carry out His will; people like Joseph’s brothers, the prophet Jonah, Balaam, the whole Assyrian army, the Pharaoh of the Exodus, Cyrus the Persian, Saul of Tarsus (after first converting him), Pontius Pilate, all the Jewish mob and most of the Sanhedrin who clamoured for Christ to be crucified. In one way or another God used these people as the means for carrying out His will and for bringing Himself glory.

If that is the case, as it demonstrably is, then why are so many Christians unable to admit that it is perfectly possible for God to use people like Kurt Aland to further His own glory? The author says “When we would evaluate the work of a textual critic—one who would compile a text of the original languages for the Bible—we must look for a man who believes the things we have just discussed [issues of inerrancy and infallibility]. He must believe that the Bible is the Word of God, because ‘every word of God is pure.’ He must believe that God has promised to preserve that Word pure, in every age. He must also believe that God will do this in the line of the true Church.” But why must a textual critic believe any of this? Does the author of the article in the Record believe that God is dependant on feeble, fallen sinners to protect His Word? Does he not think enough of God and His omnipotent power to believe that what God has said, He brings to pass? “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (Isaiah 55:11 KJV).

Some will argue that the issue is the truth or falseness of a translation: the KJV being true and every other one being false. Yet, when the entire counsel of God's Word is taken into consideration, I do not think any significant Christian doctrine is being put in jeopardy by any of the best and most responsible modern translations such as the NASB, the NKJV or even the NIV (although I know many who will vehemently disagree with this opinion). The argument is nothing more than a red herring. It is brought out disguised as a legitimate argument by those who, more for cultural reasons than any other, wish to impose their own views on others by dressing up in pious garb.

The charge of heresy or even apostasy has often been leveled at modern textual critics and translators by men who are staunch defenders not only of the KJV but of the character of the men who translated the Received Text into the KJV. But for all their apparent godliness, many of these translators were far from perfect as individuals. In fact several of them could not truthfully be described as anything less than scoundrels and hypocrites. That did not deter God however, in His purpose of preserving His Word by having these men translate the Received Text into the most sublime translation of any, before or since. You see, it was up to God to preserve His Word, not us. He could never rely on mere fallen sinners to keep His Word pure and unadulterated, so He confounded the wisdom of the wise by using our very own sinfulness and imperfection to preserve His Word. (It is not often admitted, but Desiderius Erasmus (c. 1469-1536), the man who was largely responsible for bringing together the various fragments of the Byzantine text into what came to be called the Textus Receptus, the Received Text, and which is revered as the true Word of God by most Reformed Christians and virtually all “Fundamentalist” denominations, all of which denounce both Romanism and Humanism, was himself not only a Romanist Catholic but a Humanist to boot! An unlikely candidate for God to use for the furtherance of His good purpose, but there it is nonetheless.)

It is also worth noting that no translation of the Bible will be of any good—except perhaps as a paper weight or a door stop—unless the Holy Spirit makes it so. The author of the article in the Quarterly Record has said that, “[The Textual Critic] must also believe that God will do this in the line of the true Church.” The underlying assumption of this statement being that the true Church is an institution based on the KJV of the Bible, which it is not. The true Church is the sum of all true believers, regardless of what “church” they attend or what Bible versions they use. The true Church is the totality of all those who are born-again by the regeneration and justification given them by God. It is the Holy Spirit who enables the born-again believer to actually understand the Bible. Without the Holy Spirit’s working in the mind and heart of the believer, the Bible is just a book of rules, irrelevant customs and supernatural enigmas. “At that very time He rejoiced greatly in the Holy Spirit, and said, ‘I praise You, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight’ ” (Luke 10:21).

Soli Deo Gloria.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good post, Jamie. Incidentally, I know of many good Reformed theologians who use the NIV. One man who uses it actually taught Greek at Westminster Theological Seminary. I find the TBS arguments totally fallacious. I would say well over 90% of Reformed churches use a translation other than the KJV and almost every single Reformed seminary uses the critical text rather than the textus receptus!

Anonymous said...

Jamie,

Well said, I agree. This is my primary conflict with the TBS group. They tend to vilify all who are not KJV only and use these types of character assaults to win the argument rather than dealing with the text itself. You know my position, I think that the KJV is a good translation (we use it in worship) but not the only good one out there. People need to remember that Erasmus was not the greatest guy on the block either and he did a pretty good job on the TR. There are many solid modern day textual critics that have sound arguments for the use of versions other than the KJV the least of them not being Edward Donnelly. I have encountered many people over the years that take strong stands on this topic and sadly most of them know very little or nothing about the original languages.

We enjoyed our time with you folks in Vancouver and look forward to coming again.

Blessings,
Bob Hackett