Truelove Textual Info?

Status
Not open for further replies.

NM_Presby

Puritan Board Freshman
Does anyone know what has happened to Robert Truelove’s Traditional Text material online? I’ve been wanting to go back through some of his stuff, as I’ve found him to be probably the most articulate and irenic representative of the camp, but lo and behold it seems most of his material has disappeared from the internet (YouTube and Facebook being the two particular places I’ve looked).

I have found his blog, which appears to be inactive, but would love to track down videos and other material if possible.

Can anyone fill me in on what’s going on there? TIA
 
Last edited:

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
As someone who was very active in the TR/Confessional text movement, i would have to say that due to the very opposite spirit that many of us TR guys decided to take, he likely did not find it worthwhile to be involved anymore. I may be wrong about that, but that would be my hunch.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
I wish he had kept his videos active, they were some of the best out there on the subject. They were very helpful to me as I was coming to the position, along with Jeff Riddle's "Word Magazine" podcasts. Dr. Riddle is also very charitable and a true scholar.
 

NM_Presby

Puritan Board Freshman
As someone who was very active in the TR/Confessional text movement, i would have to say that due to the very opposite spirit that many of us TR guys decided to take, he likely did not find it worthwhile to be involved anymore. I may be wrong about that, but that would be my hunch.
I believe this, but it saddens me! The TR movement needs more men like Truelove and Riddle. It is filled with many bad arguments and often an extremely divisive/polemical spirit. As someone who has only recently really become deeply convinced of the TR position, I want to see more of the good stuff.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
He was last active on here March 20 2022 (according to his profile).

Are you still involved in the Confessional text movement?
I am still an adherent to it, and most of my videos, articles, etc are still out there, but I have not actively written or spoken on the topic in over a year (outside of a forthcoming publication). This is due first to simply not having the time with three young children, pastoring a church and then changing my doctrinal convictions on baptism/church government and joining the OPC; and, secondly, I needed to step away for a time, I was becoming overly concerned with the topic and allowing myself to indulge in sinful attitudes and actions because of it. Out of one side of my mouth I was saying that whether one uses a critical text or traditional text translation has nothing to do with whether or not someone was orthodox, and out of the other side I was treating many who disagreed with me as though they were denying the gospel. I still receive notes on a regular basis thanking me for my work and how it helped others, but I needed to focus on more practical matters in my ministry for a time. Maybe soon I will take some of the opportunities I've been offered to speak or write on the subject, but it's just not on my front burner anymore.
 

Stephen L Smith

Administrator
Staff member
I am still an adherent to it, and most of my videos, articles, etc are still out there, but I have not actively written or spoken on the topic in over a year (outside of a forthcoming publication). This is due first to simply not having the time with three young children, pastoring a church and then changing my doctrinal convictions on baptism/church government and joining the OPC; and, secondly, I needed to step away for a time, I was becoming overly concerned with the topic and allowing myself to indulge in sinful attitudes and actions because of it. Out of one side of my mouth I was saying that whether one uses a critical text or traditional text translation has nothing to do with whether or not someone was orthodox, and out of the other side I was treating many who disagreed with me as though they were denying the gospel. I still receive notes on a regular basis thanking me for my work and how it helped others, but I needed to focus on more practical matters in my ministry for a time. Maybe soon I will take some of the opportunities I've been offered to speak or write on the subject, but it's just not on my front burner anymore.
Your Youtube message states there is a riddle - a major shift has taken place. It was a riddle for me. ;) I thought I recognised you but was unware you went from a Baptist to Padeobaptist position.

Actually I have also moved from a Reformed Baptist to a Padeobaptist position. I see we worship in sister churches :)

I have become more sympathetic to the Received text but the "which Received text" is still a minor sticking point for me.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
Your Youtube message states there is a riddle - a major shift has taken place. It was a riddle for me. ;) I thought I recognised you but was unware you went from a Baptist to Padeobaptist position.

Actually I have also moved from a Reformed Baptist to a Padeobaptist position. I see we worship in sister churches :)

I have become more sympathetic to the Received text but the "which Received text" is still a minor sticking point for me.
Amen praise God.
The "which TR" question is a distraction on both sides of the debate in my opinion. Let's start with the methodology and theology, after we have established what the Bible and our reformed heritage has to say about preservation, we can turn to specific editions and variants. Using any one of the reformation era texts (TRs) is fine I think. The differences are very minor, and there has to be some room for examination of these differences. Our own reformed fathers all did this, as Milne demonstrates in his work.
 

Taylor

Puritan Board Graduate
Yes sir. I was the pastor there from its planting until we merged with Reformation OPC after the majority of the church became convinced of paedobaptism and Presbyterianism. We merged in September 2021.
You're out there with ol' Joel Ellis! He and my pastor are good buddies. My pastor speaks very highly of him.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
You're out there with ol' Joel Ellis! He and my pastor are good buddies. My pastor speaks very highly of him.
Correct! He was a good friend for a few years and was helpful in my transition from an inconsistent view of the covenant and baptism to embracing paedobaptism. Our church (Agros Reformed Baptist) actually met in ROPC's sanctuary on Lord's Day afternoons, so when we merged, all we had to do was start showing up earlier lol
 

Eyedoc84

Puritan Board Sophomore
Your Youtube message states there is a riddle - a major shift has taken place. It was a riddle for me. ;) I thought I recognised you but was unware you went from a Baptist to Padeobaptist position.

Actually I have also moved from a Reformed Baptist to a Padeobaptist position. I see we worship in sister churches :)

I have become more sympathetic to the Received text but the "which Received text" is still a minor sticking point for me.
I would argue that the “which TR” question is at last the right question to ask! It is often framed as an attempted reductio ad absurdum from the CT side (I realize this isn’t you), but I just turn it around and say yes! That’s it! Which text(s) has God preserved and we received, particularly at the highest historical point of returning the word of God to the people of God en masse? That’s where the conversation should start and end, not with tomorrow’s archaeological dig uncovering a reading with zero historical provenance, no known chain of custody in the church, no evidence of usage by God’s people throughout the ages.

I would consider myself a “moderate” TR guy, as the other thread title suggests. The right readings are in the TR body. Scrivener’s 1894 is probably the closest single edition, and I understand and sympathize with the providential arguments that it is the definitive preserved edition, but I am not that dogmatic and recognize the legitimacy of conversation regarding some of the variants within the TR corpus.
 

John Yap

Puritan Board Sophomore
As someone who was very active in the TR/Confessional text movement, i would have to say that due to the very opposite spirit that many of us TR guys decided to take, he likely did not find it worthwhile to be involved anymore. I may be wrong about that, but that would be my hunch.

Sorry brother, could you clarify what you meant on this 'opposite spirit'? I could take a guess but I think it best to get a clarification from you.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
Sorry brother, could you clarify what you meant on this 'opposite spirit'? I could take a guess but I think it best to get a clarification from you.
Certainly brother. OP had mentioned enjoying Rev. Truelove's charitable and irenic spirit. I was commenting on the fact that many in the Confessional Text/TR movement have chosen to adopt the opposite spirit. I was one of them for some time sadly.
 

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Professor
Hello Chris @Pilgrim , I can't dig through the FB link to get to 2016 material on Robert T's views, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. Some 15-16 years ago – see TTer gone CTer – Robert was a CT man, and then, further studying the matter changed his view to what he called the Canonical Text, and held to a TR AV-friendly view. I don't have reason to believe he has changed from that.

in 2015, one may see what he held to here: Ecclesiastical Text — Response to James White. No doubt he refined his views in the years following.
 

pmachapman

Puritan Board Freshman
Let's start with the methodology and theology, after we have established what the Bible and our reformed heritage has to say about preservation, we can turn to specific editions and variants.
I agree with this completely.

The hardest thing I find when trying to engage people on this issue is the tendency for people to treat Erasmus, Beza, et al as if they were children of the enlightenment, and so employed modern rational methods/criticism/etc. Hearing statements like "If Stephanus had access to the manuscripts we have today, he would come up with something like the Critical Text" makes me wonder if our churches have a form of pre-enlightenment amnesia.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
I agree with this completely.

The hardest thing I find when trying to engage people on this issue is the tendency for people to treat Erasmus, Beza, et al as if they were children of the enlightenment, and so employed modern rational methods/criticism/etc. Hearing statements like "If Stephanus had access to the manuscripts we have today, he would come up with something like the Critical Text" makes me wonder if our churches have a form of pre-enlightenment amnesia.
Yes amen. That's exactly right. Jan Krans (no friend of TR position) explicitly states in his book time and again that a large part of Beza's text critical methodology involved "the kind consideration of the church", I.e., not what the "evidence" showed as the "best reading", but what the church had traditionally used and received. That doesn't make his view correct mind you, but it certainly doesn't make it modern.
 

SeanPatrickCornell

Puritan Board Junior
Yes sir. I was the pastor there from its planting until we merged with Reformation OPC after the majority of the church became convinced of paedobaptism and Presbyterianism. We merged in September 2021.

How's Taylor DeSoto doing? Did he switch back to being paedobaptist (again)?
 

Pilgrim

Puritanboard Commissioner
Hello Chris @Pilgrim , I can't dig through the FB link to get to 2016 material on Robert T's views, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. Some 15-16 years ago – see TTer gone CTer – Robert was a CT man, and then, further studying the matter changed his view to what he called the Canonical Text, and held to a TR AV-friendly view. I don't have reason to believe he has changed from that.

in 2015, one may see what he held to here: Ecclesiastical Text — Response to James White. No doubt he refined his views in the years following.
I was referring to 4/16/2022:

For tomorrow's Lord's Day sermon I will unapologetically preach of Christ's resurrection from Mark 16:9-20. The idea that this text, universally received by Christians for over 1,500 years as canonical scripture, is an uninspired, spurious addition to Mark's gospel is antithetical to the risen Lord Jesus Christ. The same God who raised Christ from the dead is also able to preserve his word pure in all ages.
That said, I will preach this text without distracting from the word of God with a prelude on textual criticism. I preach it because it is the word of God.
 

Stephen L Smith

Administrator
Staff member
The "which TR" question is a distraction on both sides of the debate in my opinion. Let's start with the methodology and theology, after we have established what the Bible and our reformed heritage has to say about preservation, we can turn to specific editions and variants. Using any one of the reformation era texts (TRs) is fine I think. The differences are very minor, and there has to be some room for examination of these differences. Our own reformed fathers all did this, as Milne demonstrates in his work.
I agree with this completely.

The hardest thing I find when trying to engage people on this issue is the tendency for people to treat Erasmus, Beza, et al as if they were children of the enlightenment, and so employed modern rational methods/criticism/etc. Hearing statements like "If Stephanus had access to the manuscripts we have today, he would come up with something like the Critical Text" makes me wonder if our churches have a form of pre-enlightenment amnesia.
Critical Text man Mark Ward, recently made comments about the Confessional Text position on Iron Sharpens Iron (a Reformed Baptist radio ministry). I have real difference with his argument (especially his epistemology). I said the 'which TR' is a minor sticking point for me. Mark Ward makes a number of assertions on this. I think a minor revision of the TR may bring some certainty? Do you agree? How do you respond to Dr Ward?

A series of essays in defense of the TR from reformed ministers. Some of the members here on PB, including myself, were able to make contributions.

Edit: Coming soon, Summer 2022

I wondered if this book deals with the arguments Mark Ward (and others) make.
 

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
Critical Text man Mark Ward, recently made comments about the Confessional Text position on Iron Sharpens Iron (a Reformed Baptist radio ministry). I have real difference with his argument (especially his epistemology). I said the 'which TR' is a minor sticking point for me. Mark Ward makes a number of assertions on this. I think a minor revision of the TR may bring some certainty? Do you agree? How do you respond to Dr Ward?


I wondered if this book deals with the arguments Mark Ward (and others) make.
The book does not specifically address them. It is collection of essays from ministers giving our reasons for using the TR. Some of the essays deal directly with arguments, some indirectly, others just give personal and practical reasons.
 
Last edited:

danekristjan

Puritan Board Freshman
Critical Text man Mark Ward, recently made comments about the Confessional Text position on Iron Sharpens Iron (a Reformed Baptist radio ministry). I have real difference with his argument (especially his epistemology). I said the 'which TR' is a minor sticking point for me. Mark Ward makes a number of assertions on this. I think a minor revision of the TR may bring some certainty? Do you agree? How do you respond to Dr Ward?


I wondered if this book deals with the arguments Mark Ward (and others) make.
I don't think a new edition of the TR would solve anything. Again, the number of variants is very small between the editions, and most can be resolved by context or theology. But a corpus view of the TR is popular among some in the camp. I think that is a tenable position. Milne's book demonstrates how these variations in the printed editions were dealt with by our reformed forefathers at great length. Overall, I find the "which TR?" objection to be moot until the issue of the theology of the text has been engaged.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top