God wrote the Bible.
All Scripture is God-breathed.
2 Tim. 3:16a
The word Scripture refers to writings. This means that the words of the Bible were breathed forth by God.
The Bible is perfect because it came from God. God wrote the Bible by inspiring people through the Holy Spirit (2 Pet. 1:21).
God watches over his word to preserve it.
I am watching over my word to perform it.
Jer. 1:12
None of God’s words will pass away.
Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
Luke 21:33
God’s word will outlast the universe.
For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
Matt. 5:18
Jots are the smallest Greek letters. Tittles are the smallest Hebrew marks. The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. The New Testament was written in Greek. Jesus said that the Scriptures that God originally wrote in both Greek and Hebrew are never going to pass away.
Since God’s word will never pass away and he watches over his word, we can be confident that God is going to preserve his word on the earth. We can trust that the Bible we have today is completely accurate and exactly similar to what the apostles and other holy men wrote 2,000 years ago.
We Need an Accurate Bible
God wants his people to have an accurate version of the Bible. He doesn’t want his word distorted. He doesn’t want anything added to or taken away from his word.
In English, there are several translations of the Bible. These translations are often very different. For example, the NIV and ESV don’t contain Matthew 17:21.
However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.
Matthew 17:21
The KJV and MEV on the other hand, do contain this verse.
Did Matthew originally write “this kind comes not out but by prayer and fasting”? Is that part of the inspired word of God or not? If it is, it should be in the Bible. If it’s not, it shouldn’t be there.
We don’t want an incorrect Bible.
Even apparently minor differences matter. Every word from God is important, for the Bible is the basis of our faith and life. We need every word from God just as God intended it to be. If we’re missing any word from God, we’re missing what God wants us to know. And we don’t want the word of God polluted with extraneous words from man. We want the word of God, as God intended it to be.
See for example 1 Timothy 3:16 in the NKJV:
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
1 Tim. 3:16 NKJV
The ESV on the other hand reads as follows:
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
1 Tim. 3:16 ESV
Which is it? God or he?
Even minor changes make a big difference. We need to know what God said – exactly.
But there are bigger problems than just a few changed words.
The Case of the Missing Verses
The following verses (besides Matt. 17:21) are completely missing from the ESV, NIV, and NASB.
For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.
Matt. 18:11
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation.
Matt. 23:14
If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.
Mark 7:16
Where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:44
Where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.
Mark 9:46
But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father in heaven forgive your trespasses.
Mark 11:26
So the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And He was numbered with the transgressors.”
Mark 15:28
Two men will be in the field: the one will be taken and the other left.
Luke 17:36
In these lay a great multitude of sick people, blind, lame, paralyzed, waiting for the moving of the water. 4For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had.
John 5:3-4
Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
Acts 8:37
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
However, it seemed good to Silas to remain there.
Acts 15:34
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
Rom. 16:24
The bold portion of the following verse is omitted from the NIV, NASB, and ESV:
For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.
1 John 5:7-8
What’s going on?
Is our Bible inerrant or not?
When the Bible is taken as a whole, none of the differences among modern English versions affect the fundamental doctrines of the faith. True Christianity is upheld throughout them all.
And yet, we cannot logically claim that all Bible versions are inerrant if one version says that John wrote something and another said that he didn’t. They can’t both be right.
Greek Versions
The New Testament was originally written in Greek. To determine which English version of the Bible is most accurate, we must go back to the original Greek.
There are two Greek versions of the New Testament which underlie most modern English versions of the Bible – the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text.
The Critical Text omits the verses mentioned above. The Textus Receptus includes them.
One is right. The other is wrong. They both can’t be right. That would be logically impossible.
Preservation by Copying
None of the original writings of the New Testament survive, but they were faithfully copied and handed down among God’s people. Copies of those copies were made, and then more copies were made.
Copyists took their work seriously. They knew they were responsible for transmitting the word of God. As they copied, God was working with them, preserving his word upon the earth.
Considering that God watches over his word to preserve it, and that not one jot or tittle from his word is going to fail, we can be confident that the copies we have today are, on the whole, accurate reflections of the originals.
God preserved the Old Testament through copying, too. Diligent scribes copied the original writings from Moses, David and others. Those copies were copied, and then those copies were copied. This copying was all done with amazing accuracy, ensuring that Israel always had an accurate copy of the word of God. Not the smallest mark went missing. The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls (ancient Old Testament writings) confirmed the remarkable accuracy with which the Old Testament was copied by God’s people throughout history.
God preserved the New Testament in a similar way, providentially guiding the copying of his word on the earth.
A few errors in copying were made here and there. Some scribes skipped parts through carelessness. Other scribes introduced errors because of faulty theology, changing a verse here and there to be more in tune with their particular viewpoint. But by comparing all the copies of the Bible and recognizing which manuscripts were widely used and accepted by God’s people throughout history, these errors can be weeded out.
The Textus Receptus
The Textus Receptus generally reflects the Greek New Testament that was used and handed down throughout history among God’s people. Textus Receptus is Latin for Received Text.
The Textus Receptus underlies most Bible translations throughout history, including Luther’s, Tyndale’s, Wycliffe’s, and the King James Bible.
The Greek manuscripts that survive until today overwhelmingly support the readings of the Textus Receptus.
- 85% of ancient papyri used Textus Receptus
- 97% of ancient uncial manuscripts used Textus Receptus
- 99% of old minuscule manuscripts used Textus Receptus
- 100% of lectionaries used the Textus Receptus.
The broad support of the Textus Receptus among Greek Manuscripts is why it (or a manuscript very similar to it) is also sometimes called the Majority Text. The Textus Receptus reflects the majority of the Greek texts that were used in churches worldwide throughout history.
The Critical Text
In the 1800s, skepticism about the Bible began growing in the universities of Europe and North America. Liberal scholars began questioning many fundamental aspects of the faith. They questioned whether miracles actually happened, whether the Bible is historical, whether Jesus is actually God, and whether God actually wrote the Bible. They also began questioning whether the Textus Receptus is reliable.
Out of this doubt about God and his word emerged a new field of study – textual criticism.
Textual criticism stands over the word of God, purporting to determine what should be a part of God’s word and what shouldn’t.
Westcott, Hort, and other liberal scholars led this movement in the mid to late 1800s. They began to emphasize a few Greek manuscripts that were slightly different from the Textus Receptus. One of these manuscripts was from the Vatican called Codex Vaticanus. Another manuscript was from the Sinai peninsula called Codex Sinaiticus. These two manuscripts were originally written in Alexandria Egypt.
These newly discovered manuscripts were different than the Textus Receptus. They were missing entire verses, and they changed important words. Yet for some reason, these scholars propagated the theory that these two recently-discovered manuscripts were more accurate than the Greek versions reflected by the Textus Receptus. These two manuscripts were given primacy over versions that had been in use by the church for well over a thousand years.
The problem is, ancient Alexandria was the center of the heresy Arianism which denied both the deity of Christ and the Trinity. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus may have been tainted by this heresy. This might be the reason why these manuscripts deviate from the Textus Receptus, and it probably explains why they were not used as a basis for the New Testament in most parts of the world. Their unique readings were not accepted by most churches.
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are indeed old, dating possibly to the 4th century. Yet, just because a manuscript is slightly older than another doesn’t automatically mean it’s more accurate. An older manuscript which was recognized as inaccurate would not have been copied and handed down by the churches. Only accurate manuscripts would have been copied repeatedly and passed down. Better manuscripts would have worn out with frequent use and eventually been discarded and replaced by copies, while inferior manuscripts that were unused would have been ignored.
In spite of the problems with Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, critical scholars who questioned the Textus Receptus reconstructed the New Testament largely on the basis of these two Greek manuscripts. They created a new Greek text called the Critical Text. The Critical Text is known today as the Nestle-Aland text. It is the text used by the United Bible Societies.
The Critical Text underlies modern Bible versions like the ESV and NIV.
The Critical Text Strains Credulity
For several reasons, the Critical Text strains credulity.
First of all, it’s hard to believe that God allowed his pure word to be hidden away in the Vatican for 1,000 years while men like Tyndale struggled against the Catholic Church to get the word of God out into the world. Tyndale and other reformers all used the Textus Receptus. Were they using a faulty Bible while the true Bible was hiding away in the Vatican?
It’s even harder to believe that the rediscovery of a manuscript hidden in a monastery in the Sinai peninsula in the 1800s allowed liberal theologians to suddenly bring the inerrant word of God back to light. This would be to suppose that the Greek versions that had been passed down through the churches were wrong, and this hidden manuscript was right.
Can we reasonably believe that liberal scholars were restoring the inerrant word to the church while men of faith like Tyndale and Wycliffe were propagating an inferior version?
I think not.
Worse, the Critical Text presupposes that God did not preserve his inerrant word among his people for centuries. It claims that God’s inerrant word was only was rediscovered through the clever scholarship of the 1800s, and for centuries the Bible was riddled with error. Did God preserve his word on the earth, or didn’t he?
The Textus Receptus was based on what church leaders believed were the best manuscripts in their day. Those manuscripts in turn were based on the best manuscripts that preceded them, and so on. Ultimately, these manuscripts go back to well before the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and ultimately to the apostolic originals.
Early translations of the New Testament into other languages, some of which predate the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, were based on manuscripts which reflect the reading of the Textus Receptus. These very early translations don’t reflect the readings of the two Alexandrian manuscripts, confirming the aberrance of the Alexandrian text.
For centuries, error-ridden manuscripts like Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were left in corners of the world, forgotten. Their rediscovery in the 1800s does not mark a recovery of the inerrant word of God, but a recovery of faulty manuscripts that had been left on the wayside. Satan is now using these error-ridden manuscripts as tools to corrupt the word of God.
God has preserved his word throughout history. He did so with the Old Testament, and he has done so with the New Testament. He has ensured that throughout the centuries of the church, his people have generally had access to an accurate Bible that exactly reflected the original writings of the apostles.
The Textus Receptus reflects the Greek version of the New Testament that God providentially preserved among his people. The Critical Text is an invention of humanistic scholarship of the 1800s.
One is accurate. The other is not.
We need the word of God as God intended us to have it. We cannot settle with a corrupted or altered version, for the word of God is of paramount importance.
The best English versions of today are based on the Textus Receptus.
The major English versions that are based on the Textus Receptus are the KJV, NKJV, and MEV. These are reliable, while the versions based on the Critical Text are not. For those who would like a modern, more readable version of the Bible, the NKJV might be the best.
For more detailed information about this vitally important subject, please read The Revision Revised, by Dean Burgon. He delves into this issue in a scholarly way, convincingly concluding that the Textus Receptus is superior to the Critical Text. He proves that the Critical Text is riddled with faulty scholarship in spite of its pretensions.
Bethel Cornerstone 