New Testament
THREE CHARGES AGAINST THE MAJORITY TEXT THEORY EXAMINED AND REFUTED
© 2020, by John Tors. All Rights Reserved. We have recently been contacted regarding three charges brought against the Majority Text theory[1] by advocates of the so-called “critical text.”[2] These charges may seem plausible at first glance, but upon examination they are found to have no substance. In the following we list the charges and refute them. 1) As we find new texts the majority can change the text so …
THE THREE-HEADED MONSTER AND THE EVANGELICAL BETRAYAL OF THE BIBLE: Exposing the Major Weapons Levied against the Trustworthiness of the Bible
The Bible has come under attack by liberal scholars using three main weapons: historical criticism, textual criticism, and Darwinism. The acceptance by evangelical scholars of the liberal paradigm assumptions has led to an erosion of belief in inerrancy and undermines the case for Christianity.
IS THE BYZANTINE TEXT THE RESULT OF “A LONG PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT AND STANDARDIZATION”? An Examination of Klaus Wachtel’s Text Critical Model
For a long time, that explanation was that the Byzantine text was a recension (i.e. a deliberately edited and altered version of the original New Testament)
WHY THERE IS AN ERROR IN MARK 1:2 IN YOUR BIBLE: Another Example of the Evangelical Betrayal of the Bible
The original reading of Mark 1:2 is not “in Isaiah the prophet”, which is an error that evangelical scholars who accept Griesbach’s canons unsuccessfully try to dodge. The reading “in the prophets” is found in the overwhelming majority of manuscripts and the earliest and best material, including the writings of Irenaeus.
CREATION MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL AND THE THREE-HEADED MONSTER: WHY THE MONSTER WINS
While CMI does excellent work in battling Darwinism, in the areas of historical criticism and textual criticism they readily defer to evangelical scholars such as James Patrick Holding, passing along liberal paradigm assumptions which undermine the credibility of the Bible and the doctrine of inerrancy.
FRAGMENTS OF ERROR: Creation Ministries International (CMI) Errs Yet Again on Textual Criticism
It is safe to assume that the various functionaries of Creation Ministries International (CMI) feel a great deal of frustration over the fact that their well reasoned arguments for young-earth creationism are not accepted by professing Christians who are supposed to view the Bible as the very word of God. Perhaps they are even more frustrated when such Christians do not even reject CMI’s arguments but ignore them completely, as if CMI were just whistling in the wind. If so, they can understand our frustration at CMI’s refusal to consider the facts …
“IGNORANT OF HIS DEVICES” Creation Ministries International (CMI) Errs Again on Textual Criticism
Attacking the trustworthiness of the word of God remains in the forefront of Satan’s devices, and this is not surprising. While Christianity is at its heart about reconciliation with God through His Son Jesus Christ (e.g. 2 Corinthians 5:19), all the objective knowledge we have about Jesus Christ, about the Triune God, about sin and salvation and Godliness and eternal life comes from the Bible, so our view of its reliability is crucial.
WHAT ABOUT THE COMMA JOHANNEUM (1 JOHN 5:7b-8a)?
Although the absence of the Comma Johanneum in almost all Greek manuscripts strongly indicates it was not in the autograph, the Greek grammar indicates that it might indeed be part of the original autograph
FATAL PROBLEMS WITH REASONED ECLECTICISM TEXTUAL CRITICISM: Follow-up Comments on the Tors/Costa New Testament Text Debate (Part 2)
If the Alexandrian text type is closest to the original, how did the Byzantine text come to have such an overwhelming numerical majority?
TEXTUAL CRITICISM AND THE END OF BIBLICAL INERRANCY: Follow-up Comments on the Tors/Costa New Testament Text Debate (Part 1)
Every saying of a prophet recorded in a book of the Bible was first said and then written. Therefore, it is perfectly correct to describe any quote of any saying by any prophet as “as was spoken by the prophet.”
THE ASSAULT ON INERRANCY AND WHAT IS AT STAKE: A Final Word to Nick Peters
We have previously posted some rather pointed rebuttals of the claims of a certain Nick Peters, along with various scholars he champions, regarding the inerrancy of the Bible and, predictably, it was not well received by some.
DROWNING IN DEEPER WATERS: A Response to Nick Peters and Another Look at the Evangelical Betrayal of the Bible
The idea that the Bible is inerrant has de facto been discarded, and its authority has therefore been severely undermined.
MARK 1:2 REVISITED: A Response to James Patrick Holding
The lesson from this story ought to be clear: A wrong answer does not become right simply by being reasserted more loudly and more stridently.
DID JESUS DENY HIS OWN DEITY IN MARK 10:18? The Significance of Jesus’ Answers to the Rich Young Ruler
In telling the rich young ruler that there is only one "Good" Teacher who can give him the answer of how to inherit eternal life, God Himself, Jesus sets the stage for a revelation of His own Deity.
EXAMINING THE CLAIM THAT THE WORDS AND EXPRESSIONS OF JOHN 7:53-8:11 ARE MORE LUKAN THAN JOHANNINE
One of the best known stories about Jesus is His encounter with an adulteress whom He refused to condemn. The story, known in academic circles as the Pericope Adulterae, or Pericope de Adultera.
A CALL FOR SERIOUS EVANGELICAL APOLOGETICS: The Authenticity of John 7:53-8:11 as a Case Study
The evidence of the early versions, the Patristic writings, the attitude of early Christians towards altering the New Testament text, and Augustine’s testimony is consistent with, and in most cases points to, the authenticity of the Pericope Adulterae as part of the original Gospel of John.
GIGO: Unearthing a Decisive New Tipping Point for Textual Criticism
The earliest New Testament manuscripts available to us are corrupt and clearly not the best. Scholars have ignored the key issue of provenance. Virtually all the earliest papyri we have came out of a garbage dump, discarded by the Christians at Oxyrhynchus, because they thought them too corrupt to keep.
A PRIMER ON NEW TESTAMENT TEXTUAL CRITICISM (IN MANAGEABLE, BITE-SIZED CHUNKS)
After insisting that the Byzantine text was secondary and corrupt, Westcott and Hort tried to account for its creation and dominance by asserting that it had been put together in the 4th-century AD
MARK 16:9-20: A Response to CMI
The Three-Headed Monster The historical era misnamed The Enlightenment, which began in the seventeenth century, was characterized by the exaltation of human reason as the means to determine truth, with the concomitant denigration of the concept of divine revelation. In particular, the credibility of the Bible came under sustained attack by Enlightenment scholars and philosophers who sought to portray the Bible not as the word of God, but as the product of mere human …
A SECOND CAINAN?
The dominant view among evangelicals seems to be that this Cainan does not belong in the genealogy, and is a scribal error introduced into Luke, probably accidentally reinserted from the legitimate Cainan in Luke 3:37.
