# The Bible Version Wars — A Godly Truce



## Jerusalem Blade (Oct 3, 2022)

*The Bible Version Wars — A Godly Truce*

This is a unique phenomenon arising in 20th and 21st century church history come to a volatile head in 2022 – *the Bible version wars* – and it threatens the “unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3) among us. There have been isolated shots, and even volley exchanges, since the time of the Reformation, but it has grown full-blown in our day of 2022. Before it gets out of hand – like a wild-fire in dry forest-land – I would like to suggest a godly truce, and may the living waters from the throne of our King moisten the ground and the trees against infernal sparks arising from the barren, fiery Abyss, which desires to foment division and hostility among us.

To keep this brief I’ll try to summarize the camps and the situation between them. On the one hand are the Reformation stalwarts holding to the type of textual editions preferred by the Reformation divines, scholars, and editors of the 16th and 17th centuries, and on the other hand are the more modern Reformed textual scholars and critics preferring the wider choices of manuscripts available since the time of the Reformation, and adhering to their own principles of discerning the more reliable among these. Generally speaking both of these camps believe that God providentially preserved His written word, our Holy Bible, although they differ in how He did this. 

The one camp I’ll call the *TR* /AV (standing for Textus Receptus and Authorized Version), and the other the *CT* / ET (standing for Critical Text and Eclectic Text, and the modern translations based on these). 

Bypassing the respective histories of these two camps, and their views of the transmission of their preferred texts – each of which would be quite lengthy – I will focus on the conflict between them at present. While the TR has been sidelined by modern scholars and textual critics as being mostly outdated and unreliable as regards fidelity to the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, and is looked upon with disdain by them, and by most of the Reformed seminaries of the day, it nonetheless has its fervent defenders, some of whom are top-notch scholars and critics in their own right. These are responding – quite assertively – against the status quo, saying it is not their texts, but the CT camp’s, that are unreliable and not to be trusted. Both camps often use language and terms indicating that the Bibles of the other camps are inferior and God-dishonoring. One side has folks within it who say that the other side’s Bibles are in fact “Satan’s Bibles”.

If one is in a local church that agrees with the views of its leaders (whichever side they may be on) there is not a problem in that assembly. Each side does have churches – and individuals within them – that ridicule and dismiss the other views.

The problems – and the warfare – arise when _both views_ are held to and expressed in congregations, and Christian organizations outside the church, one such being Puritan Board, an online discussion site, which appears to be the *epicenter* of the conflict in this day as educated clergy and lay people of both sides gather to discuss these things. The TR Camp recently published a book by a number of pastors titled, *Why I Preach from the Received Text*, which strongly asserted that its Bibles were God-honoring, while the CT’s Bibles were not.

On the other side, the CT has had a number of authors, most prominently the well-known apologist and godly pastor James White, who has written against the TR / AV camp, reproving and ridiculing them, promoting his view that the TR / AV camp is deficient in understanding and knowledge, and not to be trusted. He has assertively influenced many in the Christian world against the TR / AV school.

Despite there being many local churches who hold exclusively to one or the other of the views, I think that the majority of Christian churches have within them a mix of views – that is, whose members use both sorts of these Bibles – and they get along harmoniously. *But*, if one, or a few, within such churches start proselytizing for one view, that could easily cause division among them.

Puritan Board, although not a church, but a godly parachurch organization – tightly moderated – is one such extra-ecclesial group of believers comprised of both camps. And, *in the Lord’s providence*, conflict between these camps has arisen, some of it acrimonious, condemning and (in my view) slanderous. 

So, within a homogeneous group believing most other things in common, the Bible version issue is so significant and deeply rooted and felt, that it must be dealt with to prevent further and major schism. We must come to godly terms with each other. 

I am writing as one who holds to the TR / AV as the preferred and best understanding of the matter, yet I acknowledge that my godly friends and brothers in the CT / ET schools do in good conscience before His Royal Majesty, the Lord Jesus Christ, believe the same as regards their own understanding.

And, some of the stalwarts of them at the Puritan Board agree with me that, to preserve the peace of our Lord’s Spirit, neither camp should denigrate nor condemn the other, nor promote works that do here within the precincts of the Puritan Board.

I reckon that the authors of the two sides promoting their views are godly and seek to honor the King, _yet here_ must curtail their views if such violate the terms of the truce. _Even more_, they should openly recognize that, although each believes their own camp has a sounder take on the matter, the other in good conscience has the right in the eyes of our God to believe as they do regarding their respective versions, whether in the Greek, Hebrew, English or whatever. Simply put, they willingly allow that the other’s Bible *is the word of God to them* despite disagreement over variants among them.

We here at PB are gracious amongst ourselves despite disagreements as regards credo and paedo baptism, honoring one another though we differ. We must come to this same understanding regarding the Bible in its various editions. Believe me – one may see in my work here defending and promoting the TR / AV view – that I am not “soft” in my scholarship as regards my camp, yet I am indeed gentle, and meek in affording to my differing CT brethren *the right to hold to their own views in good conscience before our King*, which is that their Bibles are approved by Him, and by which they have their communion with Him, and by these Bibles of theirs cleave to His precious promises, even unto the death.

It is live and let live here as regards baptisms, and it is live and let live as regards Bibles. By this shall the world know that we are one in Christ, abiding in love to one another, abiding in His love, and showing to the world that God indeed has sent Him as the Saviour of humankind, even to those who believe on His name (John 17:20,21,22,23).

Reactions: Like 6 | Love 2


----------



## greenbaggins (Oct 3, 2022)

To be honest, I am sensing that there is just plain and simple fatigue about the debate at the moment on the PB. I would like nothing better than your truce. Events outside the PB may prevent that from happening. I don't know. I haven't seen any of White's videos on this, actually, so I can't actually comment on whether he is being divisive or not. My question on him would be this: is he ridiculing the TR itself, or is he ridiculing certain positions on the TR? Not the same thing, of course. I have been misread as ridiculing the TR (by Riddle, for instance), when I have done nothing of the sort. I have been harsh on certain positions, because I believe them to be divisive and sectarian. I do not regard the TR itself as divisive or sectarian at all. It is God's Word. No asterisk or qualification. So far, on the PB, I have not seen one CT advocate ridicule the TR, or denigrate it so as to be "not God's Word." I have not seen the same from the TR side, at least not universally. In order for there to be a truce, in other words, one side is going to have move further than the other. And dividing the playing field into only two camps is problematic as well. There is the MT position, the Sturzian position, and several CT positions. I wish the TR position would stop over-simplifying the various positions.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Polanus1561 (Oct 3, 2022)

greenbaggins said:


> To be honest, I am sensing that there is just plain and simple fatigue about the debate at the moment on the PB. I would like nothing better than your truce. Events outside the PB may prevent that from happening. I don't know. I haven't seen any of White's videos on this, actually, so I can't actually comment on whether he is being divisive or not. My question on him would be this: is he ridiculing the TR itself, or is he ridiculing certain positions on the TR? Not the same thing, of course. I have been misread as ridiculing the TR (by Riddle, for instance), when I have done nothing of the sort. I have been harsh on certain positions, because I believe them to be divisive and sectarian. I do not regard the TR itself as divisive or sectarian at all. It is God's Word. No asterisk or qualification. So far, on the PB, I have not seen one CT advocate ridicule the TR, or denigrate it so as to be "not God's Word." I have not seen the same from the TR side, at least not universally. In order for there to be a truce, in other words, one side is going to have move further than the other. And dividing the playing field into only two camps is problematic as well. There is the MT position, the Sturzian position, and several CT positions. I wish the TR position would stop over-simplifying the various positions.


I don't believe White has ridiculed the TR itself, if I did not remember wrongly, he actually was raised on the KJV.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Oct 3, 2022)

I think every CT, MT, and Sturzian advocate, as well as many TR supporters, would love to accep this truce. This should be an in-house discussion or friendly debate between brethren. If the extremists would stop lobbing bombs, or if their fellow-travelers old call them out on it, the tension would end immediately.


----------



## Scottish Presbyterian (Oct 3, 2022)

I propose that the moderators lock the thread, remove all responses, including this one (perhaps to a separate thread for discussion), and pin the original post to the top of the relevant forum.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Lowlander (Oct 3, 2022)

After how the last thread ended, it seems people may be hesitant to even engage the topic now, but not due to a “truce.”

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## alexandermsmith (Oct 4, 2022)

And it would also be necessary for those in the broadly CT camp to stop obsessively bringing the subject up in order to criticise the TR camp. In the last month I count eight threads devoted specifically to arguing over the merits of the two positions, *seven* of which were started by CT advocates. There are also a couple of threads which _became_ arguments over the merits of either position when CT advocates deliberately introduced the debate into the thread. It is not TR advocates who have been keeping this division to the fore of the forum recently: we have merely been responding to a constant barrage of criticism.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1 | Sad 1


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (Oct 4, 2022)

alexandermsmith said:


> And it would also be necessary for those in the broadly CT camp to stop obsessively bringing the subject up in order to criticise the TR camp. In the last month I count eight threads devoted specifically to arguing over the merits of the two positions, *seven* of which were started by CT advocates. There are also a couple of threads which _became_ arguments over the merits of either position when CT advocates deliberately introduced the debate into the thread. It is not TR advocates who have been keeping this division to the fore of the forum recently: we have merely been responding to a constant barrage of criticism.


Alexander, if you don’t understand why these threads have come up i don’t know how to get through to you. The extreme TR advocates are lobbing bombs about CT Bibles being Satanic; CT advocates don’t do this. It’s extreme TR advocates saying CT advocates aren’t confessional, not the reverse. Extreme TR‘s have called for people to leave churches that use CT Bibles- show me a CT advocate that told some one to leave a church that uses the NKJV *because* it was a TR translation!

Reactions: Like 6


----------



## alexandermsmith (Oct 4, 2022)

PointyHaired Calvinist said:


> Alexander, if you don’t understand why these threads have come up i don’t know how to get through to you. The extreme TR advocates are lobbing bombs about CT Bibles being Satanic; CT advocates don’t do this. It’s extreme TR advocates saying CT advocates aren’t confessional, not the reverse. Extreme TR‘s have called for people to leave churches that use CT Bibles- show me a CT advocate that told some one to leave a church that uses the NKJV *because* it was a TR translation!



Who said these things on _this _forum to start all this? The recent threads all seem to be responding to things said elsewhere. Why bring these arguments onto a forum where such statements are not being made? Whatever is being said out there, on _this _board, recently, it has been the CT advocates who have been starting the threads/arguments. And no one on _this_ board, that I have seen, has defended statements like "Satan's bible" in reference to modern translations. Has anyone on _this_ board argued that churches which use modern translations are not true churches? I don't see any debate on these points. The substance of each thread has been about the substance of the debate between the two camps. If certain persons are unhappy with what is being said by other persons _somewhere else_ then they should contact those persons directly; they shouldn't bring their displeasure to a forum where such things are not being said and start stirring up discord because they want to vent.

And if _you_ don't understand that the recent division on _this_ board has been created by CT advocates then _I_ don't know how to get through to _you_.

Reactions: Sad 2


----------



## Taylor (Oct 4, 2022)

Can we close this thread? This horse has already been beaten beyond recognition, and to allow these fires to be ignited again would be less than wise. It would be very unfortunate if a plea for a truce would turn into yet again another mud-slinging contest.

Reactions: Like 6 | Amen 2


----------



## Sovereign Grace (Oct 4, 2022)

I look at it like this…use the translation that you best learn from. If it’s the KJV, then stick with the KJV. Same for NKJV, NASB, ESV, CSB, HCSB, NIV, &c.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Oct 4, 2022)

*Moderating. *Everyone else refrain; holding open for any final word from Steve; if not, let the thread close of itself.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Oct 4, 2022)

Thanks, Chris – it's fine to close it. I have nothing more to add.

Reactions: Like 2


----------

