Problem Dismissing Parts of the Bible, Pt. 2

Tweet

In my study, I came across a book that helps explain what I am talking about in Romans 8:1. I think it deals with the textual problem and also deals with the theology of the verse as well.

The following is an excerpt from Dr. Thomas Holland's Crowned With Glory, ©2000. You can get a copy both for Kindle ($3.99) and the print edition here.

"Romans 8:1 - "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

"The phrase "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit" appears in verses one and four. Most scholars consider this a special type of scribal error called dittography, which is the repetition of a letter, syllable, word, or phrase. The thought is that a scribe accidentally copied the phrase from verse four in verse one, and that the textual error repeated itself in later manuscripts. Scribal errors do occur as is testified in the large amount of variants within the textual witnesses. However, just because a word or phrase is repeated does not mean that a scribal error has occurred.

"The Greek phrase me kata sarka peripatousin alla kata penuma (who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit) is supported by the vast majority of Greek manuscripts. Among them are 33, 88, 104, 181, 326, 330, 451, 614, 630, 1241, 1877, 1962, 1984, 1985, 2492, and 2495. These date from the eleventh to the fifteenth century. The phrase is also included in Codex K (ninth century), Codex P (ninth century), and stands in the margin of Codex Sinaiticus. This is also the reading of the majority of Greek lectionaries. Early versions that contain the phrase include some Old Latin manuscripts (such as ar and o), the Syriac Harclean version, and the Georgian version. Another textual variant that contains part of the phrase reads me kata sarka peripatousin (who walk not after the flesh). This is the reading found in Codex A, Codex D06, Codex, Y, and several minuscules (such as 81, 256, 263, 365, 629, 1319, 1573, 1852, and 2127). It is also the reading of the Latin Vulgate (fourth century [1] ), and the Old Syriac Peshitta. The reading in part or in whole has massive and ancient textual support.

"The whole verse is cited, with the phrase in question, by Theodoret (466 AD), Ps-Oecumenius (tenth century), and Theophylact (1077 AD). We also have partial citation of the verse by Basil (379 AD). He writes:

"'And after he has developed more fully the idea that it is impossible for one who is in the power of sin to serve the Lord, he plainly states who it is that redeems us from such a tyrannical dominion in the words: "Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I give thanks to God through Jesus Christ, our Lord." Further on, he adds: "There is now, therefore, no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh.'

"When the phrase is not included it creates a possible doctrinal error. To say there is no condemnation of any kind to all who are in Christ Jesus is to overlook the whole of Scripture. We are told that it is very possible for those who are in Christ to suffer some condemnation, albeit not eternal condemnation. The Christian who walks after the flesh instead of the leading of the Spirit produces works of wood, hay and stubble (1 Corinthians 3:12). Everyone's works will be tried so as by fire. Fleshly works will be burned and spiritual works will endure. We are told, "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire." (1 Corinthians 3:15). Therefore, worldly Christians face a certain amount of condemnation.

"We must remember that the word condemnation not only carries the meaning of judgment, but also of disapproval. [3] John informs his "little children" that the heart of the believer is able to pass such condemnation or disapproval on our Christian living (1 John 3:20-21). Not only is there a judgment for believers who stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ (1 Corinthians 3:12-15; 2 Corinthians 5:9-10), but there can also be a judgment on believers that may cost them their lives if they continue in sin (Acts 5:1-10; 1 John 5:16). Biblically speaking, there is condemnation for believers who walk after the flesh and not after the Spirit. Consequently, the phrase at the end of Romans 8:1 is theologically sound."

Although this can get a little technical for the layman, my point is that we can keep the Bible that was delivered to us and still be faithful to an exegesis (studying of the Bible) that includes passages that have been questioned by certain textual scholars of the 1800's. All of the manuscripts deserve that.

Food for thought.

Pastor Trey Rhodes

Read Part 1 here

Posted with Blogsy

Problem Dismissing Parts of the Bible, Pt. 1

Tweet

As I was studying Romans 8 for my sermon, I read these words from a Biblical scholar that I greatly respect. He was dealing with Romans 8:1: "'There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.' Be sure to put a period at this point, if one is not there in your Bible. The remainder of that verse does not belong in the original." (Romans: the Gospel of God's Grace, The Lectures of Alva J. McClain, p. 163)

What are the rest of the words? "Who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit" (KJV, NKJV). The reasoning for leaving that part of the verse out is because we are told, "archeologists have found many older manuscripts and not one has that clause in it" (McClain, p. 164). When I hear those things, I am driven to dive deeper. It certainly would make my exposition simpler if it wasn't there. But, shouldn't we be required to deal with the extant copies that are given to us rather than dismiss them outright?

I need to say, I am not a KJV only expositor. My favorite translations are the HCSB and the NKJV. Both are modern translations that strike a balance making the Word of God both enjoyable and scholarly. I actually would be placed in the Majority text camp. That means, I believe that the Majority texts of the ancient Greek manuscripts of the New Testament are accurate...not perfect, mind you...but accurate. I mean 99+% accurate. That means what you hold in your hand is fine for you to read and study and believe. Save for 3 translations, the Revised Standard, the New Revised Standard, and the TNIV (which is the current NIV), no matter of faith, theology, or practice is violated in any way.

But for me, it comes down to this, shouldn't I be held to a standard of dealing with the Scripture we have been given rather than dismissing every passage that some would question as authentic? Passages that include John 8 (the adulterous woman), Romans 8:1, Mark 16:9-20, and 1 John 5:7. My desire is that the Bible student exegete each and every passage that the Majority Text? Consider what the 5000+ manuscripts affirm. Be careful that you don't dismiss a passage because it happens to be left out in a few texts. On the surface, the older texts such as Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus should be more accurate, right? But you should remember is, when it comes to textual study, older is not always better. Age of the text might be one variable, but a much better standard is how many generations of copies the text has been transcribed from. A textual critic needs to ask both of these questions: 1) how old is the manuscript? and 2) Is this copy, no matter the age, closer to the original generationally?

We would be better served as Bible students and Bible believers asking the right questions as we interpret, exegete, and discuss all what's included in the Bible.

More tomorrow.

Pastor Trey Rhodes

Posted with Blogsy