I recorded another Word Magazine episode yesterday (9.24.13) and uploaded it to sermonaudio.com this morning. This episode continues "the series that will [seemingly] never end" reviewing Dan Wallace's 1992 article Inspiration, Preservation, and New Testament Textual Criticism.
Much of this episode responds to the charge that those who hold to the traditional text have an unbiblical desire for illegitimate certainty about the text of Scripture rather than for truth. I question whether it is wrong to seek textual certainty and stability and also consider how liberals and non-Christians use this same kind of argument against all major Christian truth claims.
I also address some of Wallace's rhetoric including his suggestions that those who hold to the traditional text are: Bultmannians, Catholics, rationalists, Marcionites, psychologically insecure, and "bibliologically schizophrenic." Wow! I sure am glad that modern-text onlyists don't indulge in the same kind of ad hominem rhetoric as the KJV-onlyists!
JTR
I just finished listening to this series of Word Magazine which I downloaded while visiting my wife's family in south Florida. Your review and point-by-point rebuttal was excellent, and I loved the format - thank Paul for the hard work he put in doing the reading ;).
ReplyDeleteThis does "beg a question":
How does the doctrine of preservation differ with those reformed confessionalists who embrace the modern text translations?
I know you can't answer for the OPC church that uses the ESV, or the ARBCA church that uses the NASB, but what is their response to Theodore Letis' view of the confession?
A,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment and glad you enjoyed the series. I'll pass on your thanks to Paul.
You raise a good question about confessionalism and modern translations. I don't know what others would say about Letis, especially on his preference for infallibility language over inerrancy language.
JTR