Is the Textus Receptus Perfect in Every Jot and Tittle? | An Academic Lecture with a Surprise Twist!

[@5crownsoutreach]

Love it, brother. There is no 'perfect' language. Only God Himself is perfect. Truth, however, is God, and perfection. Amen. God bless.

[@markwardonwords]

Amen!

[@b.rocket]

Mark is such a knowledgeable, gracious and kind brother. Edit: Just to say that false friends is such a big deal and Latinism in the KJV. I’ve read so much and thought I was understanding but I wasn’t. Here where I live in upstate SC there is a well know radio station that is KJV only. What Mark is doing is very important. I know my grandma who has passed away didn’t get to read the Bible much because she couldn’t read very well. It breaks my heart that so many preachers are encouraging KJV only and all others are of the devil.

[@markwardonwords]

Agreed. And it's for the plowboy. And the plowgrandma. I'm fighting for the average Christian-who may or may not want my help, who probably doesn't know I exist.

[@4jgarner]

What radio station is that? I'm in Piedmont so I'm curious.

[@theophilusmann7869]

Wow. What a twist!! I did not see that coming. Well done.

[@markwardonwords]

Many thanks! By its very nature, I think this is a twist that few people who need to hear it will hear-and so far, none of them have admitted publicly or privately that they were surprised.

[@theophilusmann7869]

@Mark Ward I know you said we should not begin here with our KJVO friends, and that's wise. But what about the annoying ones :) Sometimes we have to answer a fool according to his folly. This may become the pebble in their shoe.

[@markwardonwords]

@@theophilusmann7869 Agreed. I've just rarely seen it work. Maybe it's quietly working and I'm not seeing it.

[@debras3806]

No kidding!! Amazing

[@mikeashley3115]

⁠@@markwardonwordsWow, that’s amazing! I never knew this. Thank you for this nugget brother!

[@davidbrock4104]

Wondering what KJVO proponents say when to the point that the New Testament was written to the church in Greek that was in contemporary use for their day. It seems that if one is honest at all, this has to be considered. Current believers should have access to Gods word in their contemporary language, whatever it is. Great video

[@markwardonwords]

I don't recall hearing any answers to this argument, but my memory suggests that if anyone has, it was Christopher Yetzer.

[@michealferrell1677]

Absolute gold in my opinion

[@markwardonwords]

I just learned of a man who was moved away from his TR-Only position through this argument. He simply did not know that there was more than one TR. No TR defenders ever told him.

[@benanderson4118]

Interesting details and perspective on Scrivener's TR. I've used critical text versions for over 50 years so TR versions are not much in my thoughts. Scrivener's comments about textual criticism and his 1881 TR are interesting in the light of the principles employed by the CT.

[@russell13904]

God bless you, Mark. I listened to this today, already being familiar with your blog post on this topic. It is such a complex topic, but people really do believe in "perfect preservation" (an idol, in my view). I took your advice to look at the best opponents, and I have E.F. Hills' book on the way, and I sat down today with the Trinitarian Bible Society pamphlets I got at church and thought I'd start on them. My habit from years gone by was to fill any publication I read with underlining and comments in the margins. But I thought, rather than destroying my wife's experience of those pamphlets, I'd type up a running commentary. This in turn forced me to feel the need to elaborate with a paragraph every time I would have made a one-word margin complaint-to-self. I got three miniature pages through the first pamphlet and I was up to three A4 pages of comment, before I noticed, hmmm, this is probably a futile exercise at shouting at the wall. I think, given the example you have set, I might try this: just let the KJV preface author(s) and F.H.A. Scrivener do the talking. I think it should be possible to excerpt them over a page or two, to fairly thoroughly refute the KJVI position by reference to mutually trusted authorities.

[@markwardonwords]

Scrivener's Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament-particularly the last edition he worked on himself, is full of teaching from Scrivener on NT textual criticism. www.google.com/books/edition/A_Plain_Introduction_to_the_Criticism_of/hZQHAAAAQAAJ?hl=en

[@MM-jf1me]

​@@markwardonwords Thank you for sharing a link to this as well as all the links in this video's description. You were right in your presentation: I was surprised by the twist you spoke of regarding the textual critic. Thanks for all you do, Mark.

[@michaelfalsia6062]

For me being an eclectic I use all editons of the Greek NT from Erasmus to the Nestle Aland 27th edition so I have no conflicts to work through. Beside Textual criticism is a necessary endeavor ordained by God Himself. From 1516 to 1624 the TR so called has undergone textual criticism and the Majority text is the last attempt to reconstruct what is believed to be the best readings the extant manuscripts provide. For those who are part of the work begun with Wescott and Hort they too earnestly believe that they have sought to achieve the same goal. I appreciate the work of all those who dedicated themselves to this great and essential task. Why not benefit from the whole history and process?

[@dwmmx]

I knew I heard Nathan there! This is an INCREDIBLE and TIMELY lecture, brother Ward! The Tube has been recommending older vids of yours, and it's been a great learning experience for this past month. God bless!

[@markwardonwords]

I’m honored!

[@fraukeschmidt8364]

Your passion for Holy Scripture is infectious. It is the Holy Spirit that makes the Word come alive in our hearts and lives. It is the Holy Spirit that sanctifies, through the living and active word.

[@andydoane]

At 1:17:13 Mark gets Thanos-snapped out of existence.

[@rodneyjackson6181]

The TR is not perfect. BTW, which TR?

[@markwardonwords]

In other words, how could the TR be perfect if there is no “the TR”?

[@herminiohernandezjr.9316]

Fantastic lecture!

[@Outrider74]

Oh wow... to be blunt, I'm very surprised that BJU hosted this. When I was growing up in the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist church, BJU was RABIDLY KJVO.

[@markwardonwords]

I really don’t think this is true. I could be wrong, but I don’t think it was ever true. Stewart Custer of BJU opposed Peter Ruckman very strongly.

[@Outrider74]

If that’s true, then I tip my hat to them.

[@mattm4557]

Matt 5:18 is grossly misapplied. The law during Jesus life would have meant the Old Testament. Jesus was making the point he came to fulfill the old law and every prophecy would be fulfilled by him.

[@markwardonwords]

Yes, I believe this is true.

[@alexfelic1264]

25:03 😮 me !!

[@markwardonwords]

I hope it was a nice epiphany!

[@alexfelic1264]

@@markwardonwords it was ! I can’t wait to present this to my KJVO friend . I bet his face will be the same

[@howardlong6735]

The Bible wasn't written by academics, it was written under inspitation of the Spirit of God. Our KJB was faithfully translated from the Textus Receptus by the best bible scholars of all time. It is perfect in every jot and tittle and worthy of praise. It is most holy and should be trembled at. It evangelised the British Emplire for 400 years before 'higher criticism ' spawned a plethora of versions full of error and bad theology.

[@markwardonwords]

I am a firm biblical inerrantist. Therefore I stand with Scripture and the King James translators against your view of the perfection of the King James. Let me quote from the KJV preface: “[There is] no cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current [that is, circulated], notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For [we ask:] whatever was perfect under the sun, where Apostles or apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God’s Spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?” Summarized (and shortened) in contemporary English: “There is no reason why the word of God stops being the word of God when it’s translated, simply because some imperfections and blemishes occur in that translation. Was there ever anything perfect in this world aside from those things that were done by apostles?” The KJV translators go on to argue that we still call a man handsome even if he has some warts on his hand. They say that we judge things-and ought to judge things-by their predominant character, not their exceptions. This means that other translations can be good besides the KJV, and it means that the KJV translators did not regard their work as perfect. Now, this is talking about *translations,* not originals. The original Hebrew and Greek were perfect, inspired by God. But translations require human judgment-as the KJV translators knew all too well. The KJV translators were not KJV-Only. They believed their work was good, but they admitted that there were some Hebrew words they weren’t sure of the meaning of. When you call the KJV perfect, you stand against Scripture and the KJV translators.

[@deeman524]

So this same Speaker said in his UT videos that the KJV is an awesome translation of the Word of God, did he contradict himself here?

[@markwardonwords]

No. The KJV is an excellent translation. Into an English that is no longer fully intelligible, because of language change.

[@richmondpennokee]

Spurgeon de-converted from Calvinism???

[@markwardonwords]

No, he didn't. ;) It's a mildly common claim among Baptists who reject Calvinism, though.

[@johnyates7566]

My opinion dr. Ward doesn't believe God can preserve his word and is his own final authority.

[@新视角英语]

Your idea of preservation is not from the Bible, but from your kjv onlyism tradition. If God preserved His word in textus receptus, which TR do you believe is it? Why is it? Please show me Biblical support for your viewpoint.

[@新视角英语]

It seems that your final authority is not the Bible, but your tradition. Please show me any verse that tells me that only the kjv is the word of God. Where? If you can not name even one, what is your final authority?

[@patrickjames1492]

@markwardonwords This and the write-up are excellent and of lasting value. Thank you. Scrivener really opens up the issues. His views on John 1:18 would make this lecture quite different (the RV did not follow WH there), but, again, his views on Sinaiticus as correct against all others in Matthew 23:35 show a swing further in the opposite direction. @Dwayne_Green

[@eclipseeventsigns]

I know you are deleting my comment with the proof of Scrivener Aramaic. I will be making a video calling you out and showing your closed mind.

[@markwardonwords]

Did not delete. I answered it. Feel free to make it again. I asked you for a citation.

[@AnHebrewChild]

Where is the comment? I'm not seeing it anywhere.

[@markwardonwords]

@@AnHebrewChild Friend, I don't know! I don't have a spam folder. =|

[@AnHebrewChild]

@@markwardonwords hmmm that's weird. KZbin... up to its old tricks again 🤔

[@markwardonwords]

Yes. It seems to send comments with links to the trash, and then occasionally there are other comments that I get notifications about (like yours) that I go to answer and suddenly they’re gone. :/

[@learningtogrowinChrist]

"It was an attempt: at public honesty" 🫢

[@markwardonwords]

Did that comment make sense?

[@learningtogrowinChrist]

@@markwardonwords I thought it was VERY clear 😉 and revealing. Specifically for those with a certain bias towards a certain version.