As iron sharpens iron,
one person sharpens another. (Proverbs 27:17)
“Defenders of exclusive use of the King James Version… frequently appeal to Psalm 12:6-7 as a proof text for their doctrine that God promised perfectly pure preservation of the Hebrew and Greek texts of Scripture.” - Mark Ward
“These issues have not turned us into liberals…. our faith and our doctrine have been shaped by looking at what God has actually revealed and preserved for us.” - Mark Ward
“In delivering the words he wanted us to have, God chose the supernatural means of divine inspiration and inscripturation. In preserving the words he wanted us to have, God chose the providential means of human transmission and translation.” - P&D
“…we don’t necessarily need an explicit doctrine of preservation to believe and expect it; there are other theological arguments that support it.” - P&D
“Jeremiah 36…. What’s to be done in response to the wanton and rebellious destruction of the sole existing manuscript of this divine revelation? God simply called for a rewrite.” - Layton Talbert
The greatest British theologian of the 17th Century was, in the opinion of many, John Owen. Owen made distinctive contributions in a number of theological loci. His book on the mutual relationship within the Trinity and our communion with each of the Divine Persons is still the best work on the subject.1 Likewise, his manifesto for congregational-independency2 offers some of the best arguments for a Pastor-led congregational form of church government, and his The Death of Death in the Death of Christ3 is considered the book on the Reformed view of particular redemption. Owen’s teaching on the subject of the inspiration of the Bible is also most instructive, especially in view of what has been and is being taught in some evangelical seminaries and books.
Owen’s views on the crucial matter of the relationship of the Bible as we have it and the autographs are worth pondering. He, like all solid evangelicals, rests the authority of the Bibles we have, not upon some inner impression of its validity, but upon its original theopneustic character. In his, The Divine Original of the Scripture he asserted, “That the whole authority of the scripture in itself depends solely on its divine original, is confessed by all who acknowledge its authority.”4 Thus the autographs were from God and delivered to men. We possess “the words of truth from God Himself.”5
Originally posted January, 2010 as “Preservation: How and What?”
The doctrine of preservation of the Scriptures has been hotly debated in recent years. Much has been written and said, but most of the rhetoric on the subject has been closely connected to defending or rejecting one view or another on the translation issue. The result has often been that important foundational questions have been overlooked in a rush to get to conclusion A or B in the translation debate.
Among the neglected questions are these: (1) what process did God say He would use to preserve His word and (2) what form did He say that preserved word would take? Both of these are subsets of another neglected question: What does Scripture actually claim (and not claim) about it’s own preservation?
[node:22019 collapsed body]
CHAPTER II THE TESTIMONY OF CHRIST TO THE OLD TESTAMENT
Discussion