complicated stuff

So, just like theologians struggle with the order of regeneration: Faith, justification, sanctification, imputation, regeneration. What is the order, and can we determine that one must precede another, etc. Hard questions debated for a long time.


The hard question that occurs to me this morning further surrounds the Bible issue which has been foremost in my thoughts lately. The aspect of faith in this issue is necessary. The "majority" opinion is not built on a flimsy case. It isn't at its roots, horrible. We see the destruction that has been caused by veering from the straight and narrow just a bit in defense of the faith. (Recall that the majority of the straying that has affected the church was done by Christians fighting for the Bible.)

But, our hard question boils down to a matter of faith. Why do we defend the Scriptures against the lost who ask how it could possibly be God's Word? How do we defend against those unregenerate scholars that ask how we can be sure we have the complete canon? We do not assign inspiration or infallibility to those men and churches that came to the conclusion that God had written Hebrews and not the Gospel of Thomas. In the same way that the lost look at this and say that we are arguing for the Scriptures based on faith in the Scriptures and it is circular, we are susceptible to the same argumentation when arguing the KJV. They say "You are saying Erasmus was inspired; and the KJV translators." No, we accept by faith the promises God made to us, and so that when Erasmus continued the tradition of the church which lead to the KJV we see the hand of God in keeping His promise.

Reading the opposing side, however, without the proper background can be very convincing. I did some reading last night, and the guy was pretty good. He wasn't saying anything anti-Scriptural. They usually don't. He admitted we need preservation; and said we had it. This is the toughest crowd to beat. The guys who are closet to us, yet arrive at different conclusions.

The crux of the whole matter comes back to our interpretation of Scripture, and our need for certainty. What does it mean to say we have the words of God, and not just the ideas conveyed into some words? "To admit error in one part is to admit error in the whole." -- Turretin (paraphrase) This is really our trumpet. A logical fallacy committed by the other side. But that can be scary. Because logic is NOT the final authority when it comes to things of faith.

Can we admit we do not have the each specific word in English? Can we admit we do not have each specific word in Greek? Many prefer not to have thoughts of the original languages, but they must be considered.

I'm going to lay out some of their argument for a bit...I'll let you know when I am done with them.

***
God says He will preserve His Word.
History shows the MSS being changed and copied, and errors abounding.
Yet, through Providence, today we still have spread throughout all the MSS the perfect Word of God.
We can't know exactly which words are Gods, but it doesn't matter because of all the MSS, the differences are so few and so minuscule that in the end we DO still know what God was saying.
Nothing was lost.
Nothing of importance is under question. It is just differences of opinions on a fraction of the MSS.
***

I'm done with them...this is spawning another idea for an essay. Two options: the option of men deciding the truth, or trusting that we have it.

You see, the above argumentation leaves us with a whole pile of MSS evidence and the fact that somewhere inside it consists everything God has/had for us. This means we must rely on a committee of translators to decide where it is, and which words fit and which don't. It comes down to faith, again. They must have faith that the translators on their committees can find God's words, and share them with everyone else. We believe that God used the tradition of the TR/reformation, to leave us with God's words. If I can find a good way to write it up, and recall enough information about it, then maybe I will write it as a solid paper. Maybe it won't be long though. Maybe 1 page will be enough. It would be a good addendum.

That is my next project...because, as much reading as anyone can do on the subject, and as much disagreement as can be found, it seems that it MUST come down to one of the above options. Both of which leave the other saying "You are acting like the Catholic church." One can only be right, however.

I will of course follow up with that here when it is done.