Topics > Canon
A collection of Bible studies on the canonization of the Bible; that is, how it came into being, and why the Textus Receptus is reliable beyond question - even beyond the universally-recognized provenance of secular historical documents.
Of Bible Translations and Manuscripts
Visitor Comments (0)
Be the first to post a comment.
Related Articles • More Articles
The late Edward F. Hills (1912-1981) comprehensive work, "The King James Version Defended: A Christian View of the New Testament Manuscripts", presents a compelling argument for the KJV and old tradition. What makes the KJV worth defending is that it is the only translation of the ecclesiastical text (i.e., the textus receptus) other than Young's Literal 2nd edition and Greens. A scholarly yet readable introduction by the late Dr. David P. Letis is worth your time. Hills was a well trained classicist and internationally recognized New Testament text critic who analyzed the problems of modern language translations and Westscott-Hort text criticism methodology. This book is a must-have for any pastor's study.
(PDF - 225 pgs; 4th edition)
(PDF - 225 pgs; 4th edition)
Though the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy has good content, it still fails at a critical point: verbal plenary preservation. Isolating inerrancy to manuscripts no longer in our possessions leaves a gaping hole in the defense. A brother offers a whimsical illustration of this problem.
Blog - 1 page; 2018
Blog - 1 page; 2018
It's fashionable for theologians to declare Bible passages to be in error, claiming that words and phrases can be harmlessly removed. They also boldly claim God didn't promise to preserve His Word, but just "propositional truth". Others claim this is a conscience issue. Does the Bible directly address any of this? [Hint: yes!]
(Study - 2 pages; 2015)
(Study - 2 pages; 2015)