A Study on Biblical Preservation

[NOTE: I wrote this originally when I was Reformed. I have since joined the order of Primitive Baptists. Thus, I no longer adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith, nor do I consider myself a Protestant. Nevertheless, the citation of WCF 1.8 is still reflective of the historic Baptist position on the preservation of Scripture, and thus I have chosen to simply leave that portion of the article unedited.]

As Christians, when approaching the subject of Biblical inspiration and preservation, and particularly when dealing with the debate surrounding which Bible version we ought to be using, we must start with Scripture itself, and work from there. That is to say, rather than starting with unaided reason, we must subordinate our reasoning to the revelation of God as given in scripture, and use this as a basis for how we approach matters of textual criticism, manuscript data, and our overall doctrine and beliefs concerning the preservation of God’s word.

The Necessity of Revelation as our Starting Point

We must understand, first, that the debate surrounding modern textual criticism (MTC) and the text of scripture is an epistemological issue. That is to say, ones views on this subject will be informed and guided by their underlying epistemic presuppositions. Epistemology deals with the study of knowledge, how a person knows what they know, and what they base their knowledge off of. An Atheist may choose from a plethora of positions to start with, whether it be Empiricism, the belief that knowledge is gained via sensory experience, Rationalism, the belief that rationality alone is sufficient for all knowledge acquisition, or even hard skepticism, which casts doubt upon pretty much everything. For the Christian, however, we recognize that reason alone is not sufficient when dealing with this and other questions. Man, in his fallen state, has a heart which is naturally inclined towards sin (cf. Genesis 8:21; Job 15:14–16; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:9–19); his heart is full of madness and folly, and his mind is continually set on the flesh, rather than God’s Law, and is hence at enmity with God (Eccl. 9:3; Romans 8:5–8), causing him to seek out his own inventions (Eccl. 7:29).

Knowing that man is in such a fallen and wretched spiritual condition, the Christian must recognize that it is the word of God which must be our starting point for our reasoning. Jehovah is the God of all truth (Deut. 32:4; Psalm 31:5; Isaiah 65:16), and of knowledge (1 Samuel 2:3). True knowledge, wisdom, and understanding begin by recognizing and properly acknowledging him for who he truly is (Proverbs 1:7, 9:10). The Apostle Paul warns us of being led astray by man-made philosophy, which he calls “vain deceit”, taken from the fallen corrupt reasoning of human beings, rather than the infallible word of God. Instead, we must cling to Jesus Christ, who is the very Word and Wisdom of God, in whom all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden (Colossians 2:3), who has all the fullness of deity dwelling in him bodily (Colossians 2:8–9). One critical problem that MTC advocates don’t seem to realize is that, by embracing MTC, they are effectively putting the infallible word of the Living God into the hands of Atheists and skeptics — unconverted, unregenerate men at enmity with their Creator — and letting them dictate for us what does and does not belong in our Bible!

Rather than submitting to the Bible’s teaching on this issue, they are submitting to unaided, fallible human reasoning, which is not led or directed by the word of God. This first point is fundamentally critical to understanding this issue, and the reader will hopefully see this play out even further as we continue in this study. We must allow God’s word to speak for itself, and let it dictate for us how we are to approach this issue, rather than exalting the vain opinions and unaided reasoning of fallen men and standing in judgment of God’s word. Whatever position one chooses to land on in this debate, it must align and be consistent with the Biblical view.

Pro 1:7 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction. Pro 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

Col 2:6–9 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: (7) Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. (8) Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

The Historic Protestant View versus The Modern Critical View

The historic Protestant understanding of the Bible’s preservation can be clearly seen as articulated in the Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1, Section 8:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated in to the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that, the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner; and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

This understanding, as reflected by the company of Westminster Divines in the 1600s, was reflective of the general view of Protestants throughout that time period. Indeed, we may safely say that this was the predominant view of Protestants from the 1500s all the way up to the 1800s, with the advent of MTC. The Hebrew Bible, and the Greek NT, in the Protestant view, have been “kept pure in all ages”, even down to our present time. This includes all of the words which were immediately inspired by the Holy Spirit; this view is further illustrated by Kurt Aland in his work, The Text of the New Testament pg. 6–7. Aland may be cited as a hostile witness to this fact:

“Yet no real progress was possible as long as the Textus Receptus remained the basic text and its authority was regarded as canonical. The days of the fifteenth century were long past, when the text of the Latin Vulgate was accepted as sufficient. Every theologian of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (and not just the exegetical scholars) worked from an edition of the Greek text of the New Testament which was regarded as the “revealed text.” This idea of verbal inspiration (i.e., of the literal and inerrant inspiration of the text), which the orthodoxy of both Protestant traditions maintained so vigorously was applied to the Textus Receptus with all of its errors, including textual modifications of an obviously secondary character (as we recognize them today”

Notice the stark contrast in Aland’s thinking to that of earlier Protestantism. Rather than working from a Biblical foundation, and Biblical presuppositions, Aland saw the early Protestants as ignorantly maintaining and defending a heavily corrupted and erroneous Greek text. In other words, God’s word had not been kept pure, for nearly 400 years God’s people had been using a corrupted Greek text, and likewise erroneous and corrupted English translations, until modern textual critics came along and found some early fragmented manuscripts buried in the sands of Egypt.

So, which view is more consistent with Biblical presuppositions? Which position best fits with the teaching of Scripture on it’s own inspiration and preservation? Here we will simply go through some of the Biblical data and allow the reader to make that determination on their own.

The Biblical View — Preservation of God’s words

Often you may hear a MTC proponent say something along the lines of “all of the manuscripts and modern Bible versions still have the same general message, even if they contain different readings”; however, the Bible does not merely teach that the general message, or idea of what God has said, will be preserved for us. Rather, the Bible teaches that God delivered his words (plural) to his people, and that they are expected to be preserved throughout the generations. Let’s take a look at some scriptures touching on this point:

Deu 33:2–4 And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. (3) Yea, he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand: and they sat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words. (4) Moses commanded us a law, even the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob.

We see here that Jehovah God delivered the Law to Israel, and the text says that all of his saints would receive his words contained in that Law. We see this same principle taught in Deuteronomy 31, which also contains a statement about the preservation of the words of God:

Deu 31:9–13 And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD , and unto all the elders of Israel. (10) And Moses commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of release, in the feast of tabernacles, (11) When all Israel is come to appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel in their hearing. (12) Gather the people together, men, and women, and children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates, that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear the LORD your God, and observe to do all the words of this law: (13) And that their children, which have not known any thing, may hear, and learn to fear the LORD your God, as long as ye live in the land whither ye go over Jordan to possess it.

Notice that this text clearly teaches that the Levites were tasked with preserving the scriptures, and having them read to Israel every seven years, so that they might learn to obey all of the words which God had spoken, the implication here is that this was to be a continual practice for Israel and for their children in the generations after them.

Deu 6:4–9 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD : (5) And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. (6) And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: (7) And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. (8) And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. (9) And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

Once again, notice the emphasis upon the words of Jehovah. The words of God were to be memorized and walked out by the people of God, and passed on to their children. Could you imagine if one word were changed in the Shema, the declaration of the Monotheism found in verse 4? What if the divine name had been changed to that of a pagan deity? What if the number “one” was changed to some other number? Surely the MTC advocate would think that the words mattered then!

Deu 29:9 Keep therefore the words of this covenant, and do them, that ye may prosper in all that ye do.

Deu 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.

The reader should be getting the point, these statements by Moses presuppose the fact that the Law, which includes the words originally given to him, would be accurately preserved for them and their children throughout their generations. This is echoed for us even more strongly in Psalm 78:1–8:

Psa 78:1–8 Maschil of Asaph. GIVE ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth. (2) I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old: (3) Which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us. (4) We will not hide them from their children, shewing to the generation to come the praises of the LORD , and his strength, and his wonderful works that he hath done. (5) For he established a testimony in Jacob, and appointed a law in Israel, which he commanded our fathers, that they should make them known to their children: (6) That the generation to come might know them, even the children which should be born; who should arise and declare them to their children: (7) That they might set their hope in God, and not forget the works of God, but keep his commandments: (8) And might not be as their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation; a generation that set not their heart aright, and whose spirit was not stedfast with God.

Thus we see, that God promises to preserve the words of scripture, so that we may teach them to our children after us, he preserves his word so that the generations to come might hope in him!

Generations after Moses, we see that King David, while praising God for the giving of his Law, clearly believed that he possessed the original words given to Moses, just as Asaph did in Psalm 78:

Psa 119:55–57 I have remembered thy name, O LORD , in the night, and have kept thy law. (56) This I had, because I kept thy precepts. (57) CHETH. Thou art my portion, O LORD : I have said that I would keep thy words.

Psa 119:152 Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.

Psa 119:160 Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.

It is evident when reading this chapter of the Psalms, that David is continually referring to scripture, when he speaks of God’s word, his words, his Law, precepts, statutes, judgments, testimonies, etc. he is clearly referring to everything which God himself had spoken, as contained in the written scripture which he had access to in his own day. There is about a 580 year gap between the birth of Moses and the birth of David, so we can see that roughly 400–500 years later, after the giving of the Law of Moses, David still believed that God had preserved the scriptures and the words of the scriptures, for his people. This is further evidences by the fact that throughout the Psalms we find references to the exodus narrative, the provocation of God in the wilderness, the worship of the golden calf, among several other narratives found within the Pentateuch. David clearly believed that he still had exactly what Moses had written down hundreds of years prior.

Solomon, writing after his father David, likewise speaking by the Holy Spirit, further said this about his inspired words:

Pro 22:20–21 Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, (21) That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?

It is obvious that these words apply to all of inspired scripture, not just the book of Proverbs. The Holy Spirit has given us scripture so that we might know the certainty of the words of truth. This again conflicts with the view of MTC, which discourages any notion of certainty among God’s people about the words in their Bible. This is expressly manifested in the words of Daniel B. Wallace, in the preface he wrote to the book Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism, pg xii:

These two attitudes — radical skepticism and absolute certainty — must be avoided when we examine the New Testament text. We do not have now — in our critical Greek texts or any translations — exactly what the authors of the New Testament wrote. Even if we did, we would not know it. There are many, many places in which the text of the New Testament is uncertain. But we also do not need to be overly skeptical.

Not surprisingly, scholars such as Wallace have ended up rejecting the doctrien of providential preservation entirely, as can be seen from a few quotations taken from here:

First, the doctrine of preservation was not a doctrine of the ancient church. In fact, it was not stated in any creed until the seventeenth century (in the Westminster Confession of 1646).

And here:

The second argument is that this doctrine is not taught in the Bible. This is probably the most controversial thing that I will be saying in this lecture. Bruce Metsker once said, ‘I think the wisest course of action is to embrace only those doctrines that we can find in Scripture. We only believe in doctrines that we can only support biblically. The doctrine of the preservation of Scripture is not a doctrine of the ancient church. We can’t find it in ancient church documents. The first time that is seemed to be articulated was in 1646 in the Westminster Confession and in 1675 in the Helvetic Consensus. The Westminster Confession is a beloved doctrinal statement. But it is better to say that there is an error in the Westminster Confession than in the Bible.

And this is coming from one of the most well-known and highly respected Evangelical textual scholars of our day! Yet such an approach is clearly antithetical to the plain teaching of scripture on this matter.

Pro 30:5–6 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. (6) Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

Surely this saying applies to the words of God as revealed in scripture! Agur clearly believed that all the words he had access to in scripture were of God and were pure.

God makes another promise to his people in Isaiah 59:21:

Isa 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.

What are the words put in the mouths of God’s people, if not the words of the Holy Scriptures? He promises to preserve those words “from henceforth, and for ever”!

But we can see further confirmation of this from the Word of God himself, the Lord Jesus Christ, while he was here on earth, being tempted of the devil:

Mat 4:3–4 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. (4) But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

There is a 1000 year gap between David and Jesus, and we see here that Jesus believed that in his own day, he had access to every word which God had given in the scriptures. He is quoting Moses in Deuteronomy 8:3, if the verse stating that man must live by every word which comes from God’s mouth had been preserved for over 1,000 years up to that point, how much more would we expect the rest of God’s words to be preserved?

We find another very important statement from our Savior in Matthew 5:17–18:

Mat 5:17–18 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

There is much to be gleaned from this passage, however the main thrust of Christ’s point here is that he did not come to destroy the authority of the Law and the Prophets, i.e the Hebrew scriptures. He emphasizes this point by stating that “not one jot or one tittle will pass from the Law…”

The “jot” is the Greek letter ι (iota), it is the smallest letter in the Greek alphabet and corresponds to the Hebrew י (Yod), which is the smallest consonant in the Hebrew Alphabet; the “tittle”, in Greek, the keraia, has been interpreted historically in one of two ways. Most older Protestant expositors understood this to refer to the Hebrew vowel . (Chireq), which is the smallest of all the vowels. In support of this understanding, we may note that Greeks often used this term to refer to written accent and breathing marks, rather than consonants.

Thayer’s Lexicon defines it as follows:

“extremity, apex, point; used by the Greek grammarians of the accents and diacritical points.”

The other sense in which this term has been interpreted is to refer to the small strokes which differentiate between various consonants, as Thayer further explains:

“as cheth ח and he ה, daleth ד and resh ר, beth ב and kaph כ” This latter understanding is highly unlikely, however, given the plethora of extra-biblical literature showing that the term referred to accent marks and the smallest minutia of writing.”

In either case, however, we can here clearly see that our Lord, the very Word of God himself, authoritatively declares that the Hebrew scriptures would be preserved, even up until the time that heaven and earth passed away. And again, this is thousands of years after the time of Moses. Interestingly enough, he says the exact same thing about his own words:

Mat 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Still more significant in our study are the words of the Apostle Paul to Timothy, in one of the most well-known passages of scripture on this subject:

2Ti 3:14–17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it (15) and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. (16) All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, (17) that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

This text is significant because it furnishes us with the same conclusion that we drew from the previous two passages, but in a slightly different manner. We may show this from the following syllogism:

P1 Timothy had copies of the autographs

P2 Paul calls these copies of the original autographs, scripture

P3 Paul says all scripture is inspired

C1 Timothy had inspired scripture

Why is this important? It is important because Christians who advocate for the modern versions and the text which underlies them will typically state their belief in the inspiration of scripture by stating that only the original autographs were inspired; yet this view is shown to be completely unbiblical by the Apostle Paul. He clearly believed that the scriptures which Timothy had access to were all inspired of God, that is to say, God-breathed, even though they were but copies of the original.

Thus far we have seen ample testimony that the Scriptures themselves clearly teach that God’s word, and the actual words which he originally inspired, would be preserved for his people throughout all generations, as the Westminster Confession said earlier, the Old and New Testaments have been kept pure in all ages. This, then, leads us to our next point of study.

The Biblical View — God’s People Receive the Scriptures

The Bible is not a collection of books which was written up by one man at one particular point in time. Rather it is a collection of books which was collectively received by God’s people over time. The Old Testament is an obvious example of this. Moses wrote the Pentateuch, and it was given to God’s people, other scribes and prophets came along, under the guidance of the Spirit, and they wrote more works which were received by God’s people, and handed down throughout the generations. We see that this was already established during the time of Christ and his Apostles:

Rom 3:1–2 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? (2) Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

The Old Covenant assembly of Israel were committed with the very oracles of God, which is a reference to scripture. Likewise, under the New Covenant, God’s church received the Gospels and Epistles, which were likewise handed down. We can see, for instance, Paul mentioning the fact that his other epistles were to be circulated to other congregations:

Col 4:16 And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.

1Th 5:27 I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren. Notice that in Colossians 4:16, Paul tells them to ensure that the epistle is read in the congregation of Laodicea also, and likewise that the epistle from Laodicea be read among them. The epistle referred to here is the first epistle of Timothy, which was written from Laodicea:

1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. The first to Timothy was written from Laodicea, which is the chiefest city of Phrygia Pacatiana.

The Apostle Peter also makes reference to Paul’s epistles as scripture: 2Pe 3:15–16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; (16) As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

It is also evident that the other epistles, along with the Gospels and the book of Acts and Revelation, were intended to be spread around and received by the Assembly of God. Under the Old Covenant, we see that the Levites were responsible for the preservation of the Law:

Mal 2:4–7 And ye shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might be with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts. (5) My covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name. (6) The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity. (7) For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Ezra the priest is a very good example of this. He was a scribe of the Law of God, and tasked with the duty of re-transmitting the scriptures after the Babylonian exile, he is often credited with establishing the Old Testament canon:

Ezr 7:10–12 For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments. (11) Now this is the copy of the letter that the king Artaxerxes gave unto Ezra the priest, the scribe, even a scribe of the words of the commandments of the LORD, and of his statutes to Israel. (12) Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the God of heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time.

Under the New Covenant, the preservation and transmission of scripture is still the same, the Assembly has inherited the Old Testament scriptures from the Jews, and have preserved the New Testament scriptures, being priests to God:

1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Therefore, the Biblical teaching on the preservation of scripture includes the important point that the church receives and handles the word of God, not unbelieving infidels who believe that they can stand in judgment of God’s word and tell his people what does and does not belong there. The word of God does not get lost for centuries and then found again buried in a cave in Qumran, or in the sands of Egypt. Even if it is not always widely available, it is still there. And in fact, this is exactly what we see historically. The text which God’s people were using for centuries throughout the entire Byzantine empire, was later used as the basis for the printed Greek editions of the New Testament which would come out during the Protestant Reformation, when God’s word was becoming widely available to the common people again. Likewise the Hebrew Masoretic text, which had been faithfully and carefully preserved by the Jews, and utilized by later Christian scholars (such as Jerome), was later used as the basis for the first printed Hebrew Bible, by a Protestant Jew named Jacob Ben Chayyim. These are the texts which the early Protestants not only used as the basis for all Bible translations, English and others, but they vehemently defended their authority, perfection, and preservation, against the attacks of Roman Catholic counter-reformers.

Through several years of updates and revisions made to the printed Greek New Testament Editions of Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza, and updates from Tyndale’s Bible, to the Bishops’ and Geneva, the Church received the King James Bible, worked on for nearly 7 years by 6 committees of around 54 translators, which has served as the standard among English Bible translations for over 400 years now among God’s people. It, along with the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts from which it is based, has been the text which has been most widely used, and more importantly, providentially blessed by God, in bringing countless numbers of men and women to faith in Jesus Christ for hundreds of years, not only in the United States and Europe, but even in other parts of the world. The KJB is the received English translation of God’s people in history.

Concluding Remarks

This short study will hopefully serve as a primer for those interested in the Bible version debate. We have clearly laid out, in basic terms, what the Bible itself teaches about it’s preservation. Whichever position one chooses to adopt on this subject, it must cohere with the Biblical teaching, and we maintain that the Received Text position does just that. The TR was received and handed down by the church, translated and put together by godly men who feared God and trembled at his word. It was not handled by counter-reformationists and infidels, unlike today’s modern texts produced by unbelieving textual critics. Which position truly reverences the word of God? Which position truly allows the Bible to guide their thinking on this matter? Which position relies upon man’s philosophy and the vain speculations of unregenerate carnal minds? The reader will have to decide for his or her self.