# Textual Criticism and the requirements of teachers.



## christianhope (Aug 10, 2009)

Regarding the bible translation process:

I always have a hard time understanding how so many in our day are ready to discount our beloved calvinistic reformers during the times of the reformation as ignorant or foolish- yet we are ready to trust just about anyone nowaday's to translate our bibles for us as long as they meet the scholarly requirement no matter their character or theology. What ever happened to principles taught in our bibles regarding the requirments of teachers? Do the pastoral epistles now only apply to pastor's and not to those whom we give sanction to translate the very Word's of God? Yet when one now goes to seminary today he is "taught" by such men as Metzger how to properly 'divide the word of truth.' Does anyone else see a sad contradiction here? How can we expect God to be pleased with such methods?

I am not stating this to be offensive or divisive, but I personally cannot distinguish textual criticism from some form of a teaching ministry.


----------



## reformedminister (Aug 10, 2009)

I think character and theology are very important. However, I don't see it necessary that the translators be Calvinists. Otherwise, other groups would question it as being biased. However, the translators had better uphold the fundamentals of the Christian faith as outlined in the Apostles' Creed as well as the doctrine of inerrancy.


----------



## TimV (Aug 10, 2009)

> I always have a hard time understanding how so many in our day are ready to discount our beloved calvinistic reformers during the times of the reformation as ignorant or foolish- yet we are ready to trust just about anyone nowaday's to translate our bibles for us as long as they meet the scholarly requirement no matter their character or theology.



Josh, just so you know, those of us who have seen millions of such threads are wondering how much you know about Erasums, who put together the Textus Receptus. 

a) do you trust Erasmus?
b) if so, on what grounds?


----------



## christianhope (Aug 10, 2009)

Erasmus I have read some things about and I suppose I know more than most- but certainly I have not read him extensively. I know he was dedicated to correctly translating the Word of God. I do believe he was a true christian who fought against the Romish oppression of his day. 

However, I do not perceive Erasmus to being the end all for the TR. The reformers used his text to help compare/translate their own bible. 

Regardless, my question is much simpler than this, it's not based upon events of history, just principles that can be clearly drawn by the simplest of minds from the Word of God. 

If someone goes to seminary, and is handed a book by Metzger, is he not then being taught by this man? How then do we remove ourselves from the apparent contradiction against biblical principles? 

To me, as a simple man, I see this as a contradiction and fault against the overly rational mind of modern christianity. 

Blessings to you Tim and thank you for your sincere question, I hope my answer is satisfactory.


----------



## greenbaggins (Aug 10, 2009)

Kauffeld said:


> Erasmus I have read some things about and I suppose I know more than most- but certainly I have not read him extensively. I know he was dedicated to correctly translating the Word of God. I do believe he was a true christian who fought against the Romish oppression of his day.
> 
> However, I do not perceive Erasmus to being the end all for the TR. The reformers used his text to help compare/translate their own bible.
> 
> ...



I was assigned part of Barth to read. Does that mean my mind is going to be twisted? I don't believe everything Metzger says, nor do most people I know, even the staunchest defenders of the critical text. Metzger was open and honest in his textual commentary, and presented the evidence so that anyone reading the Greek New Testament _can make up their own minds_. To view Metzger as somehow trying intentionally to distort the evidence will not wash with me.


----------



## TimV (Aug 10, 2009)

> I do believe he was a true christian who fought against the Romish oppression of his day.



Josh, he was a Catholic, and he dedicated the TR to the Pope who excommunicated Luther. Luther's book The Bongage of the Will was published as a reply to Erasmus.


----------



## Whitefield (Aug 10, 2009)

Kauffeld said:


> If someone goes to seminary, and is handed a book by Metzger, is he not then being taught by this man? How then do we remove ourselves from the apparent contradiction against biblical principles?



I'm not sure what your specific objection(s) to Metzger is. Could you please specify?


----------



## christianhope (Aug 10, 2009)

I am not implying this question against anyone on the puritanboard. 

Rather, I am simply stating in a broad fashion, that biblical principles are being violated in many of our seminaries and churches when men who are unqualified in a biblical sense as teachers- are being suggested to students to learn from.


----------



## greenbaggins (Aug 10, 2009)

Kauffeld said:


> Erasmus I have read some things about and I suppose I know more than most- but certainly I have not read him extensively. I know he was dedicated to correctly translating the Word of God. I do believe he was a true christian who fought against the Romish oppression of his day.
> 
> However, I do not perceive Erasmus to being the end all for the TR. The reformers used his text to help compare/translate their own bible.
> 
> ...



Tim's points are well-taken in this regard. If it is all right for the Reformed church to use Erasmus, why isn't all right for the modern Reformed Church to use Metzger? I'm not sure one could find out whether Erasmus' theology or Metzger's was "worse." They both had significant problems, and yet they were both the premier textual critics of their day.


----------



## greenbaggins (Aug 10, 2009)

Kauffeld said:


> I am not implying this question against anyone on the puritanboard.
> 
> Rather, I am simply stating in a broad fashion, that biblical principles are being violated in many of our seminaries and churches when men who are unqualified in a biblical sense as teachers- are being suggested to students to learn from.



But you can learn from people you disagree with. It's how the material is taught (using all theologians critically, drawing them up to the standard of the Bible). All orthodox theologians have problems here and there as well. All should be read critically. Besides, it is unconscionable to have pastors who are not trained to protect the flock from problematic theology. In order to do that, one must read heretics. This has been the church's practice throughout the centuries.


----------



## christianhope (Aug 10, 2009)

TimV said:


> > I do believe he was a true christian who fought against the Romish oppression of his day.
> 
> 
> 
> Josh, he was a Catholic, and he dedicated the TR to the Pope who excommunicated Luther. Luther's book The Bongage of the Will was published as a reply to Erasmus.



Tim, 

I agree with you that he was a catholic of sorts- he never left the catholic church. However, the man also was vehemently opposed by the catholic church due to his translation of the Word of God. The man was a strange and complex character, you can't pin point him that easily. 

I've read some of the things Erasmus said against the papacy, it's amazing he never left the church, he had many harsh words against Rome.

-----Added 8/10/2009 at 10:59:01 EST-----



greenbaggins said:


> Kauffeld said:
> 
> 
> > I am not implying this question against anyone on the puritanboard.
> ...



Rev Keister,

I agree with you here. Although I perceive the problem is, is that students who are unprepared are being confronted with material like this which I do not think is right. I personally won't read Metzger or Ehrman until I'm more read on the topic. I don't want my faith being shaken. That's why I see this as a problem, I think most people believe they are stronger or wiser than they really are.

-----Added 8/10/2009 at 11:03:36 EST-----

Sorry everyone, I need to go to work. Sorry if my question seemed too unspecific. I just saw a broad problem and tried to bring it up. 

Blessings,

Josh


----------



## blhowes (Aug 10, 2009)

Kauffeld said:


> I always have a hard time understanding how so many in our day are ready to discount our beloved calvinistic reformers during the times of the reformation as ignorant or foolish- yet we are ready to trust just about anyone nowaday's to translate our bibles for us as long as they meet the scholarly requirement no matter their character or theology.


Josh, what credentials (for lack of a better term) do you think translators of the Bible should have?


----------

