Our Textual Position
There are atleast 21 different translations of the King James Greek,
Textus Receptus, Latin for the Received Text or Authorized Version Bible.
Psalms 138:2
Textus Receptus, Latin for the Received Text or Authorized Version Bible.
Psalms 138:2
(Unbelievers today in liberal and former Fundamentalist colleges and seminaries ridicule the King James Greek (Textus Receptus) because they deceitfully claim that it is based on the Greek Text of Erasmus who was a Catholic priest. Either they are too ignorant or too dishonest to tell the truth. To repeat, Erasmus published five editions of his Greek Text. Robert Stephanus published a slightly revised edition of the Erasmus Greek Text in 1551. Theodore Beza published several editions of that Greek Text and his 5th edition of 1598 became the basis of the King James New Testament. Actually it was the Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza Greek Text, which later became known as the Textus Receptus (Latin for Received Text) that the King James Translators used.)
From the beginning, a ferocious battle has raged between God and Satan over the Bible. Satan knows that if he can get us to doubt the Bible we actually doubt our Lord Jesus Christ. No one, absolutely no one, can believe in Jesus and doubt the Bible! If we doubt the Bible, we actually doubt Jesus, because without an infallible Bible, we don't have an infallible Saviour! This is why Satan has worked tirelessly to get men to destroy it, to corrupt it, and to disobey it. And his diabolical efforts have been greater in the 20th Century than all other centuries combined.
From the beginning, a ferocious battle has raged between God and Satan over the Bible. Satan knows that if he can get us to doubt the Bible we actually doubt our Lord Jesus Christ. No one, absolutely no one, can believe in Jesus and doubt the Bible! If we doubt the Bible, we actually doubt Jesus, because without an infallible Bible, we don't have an infallible Saviour! This is why Satan has worked tirelessly to get men to destroy it, to corrupt it, and to disobey it. And his diabolical efforts have been greater in the 20th Century than all other centuries combined.
Why we stand on the King James Bible
A Solemn Warning
By Edward F Hills
"In regard to Bible versions many contemporary Christians are behaving like spoiled and rebellious children. They want a Bible version that pleases them no matter whether it pleases God or not. 'We want a Bible version in our own idiom,' they clamor. 'We want a Bible that talks to us in the same way in which we talk to our friends over the telephone. We want an informal God, no better educated than ourselves, with a limited vocabulary and a taste for modern slang.' And having thus registered their preference, they go their several ways. Some of them unite with the modernists in using the R.S.V. or N.E.B. Others deem the N.A.S.V. or the N.I.V. more evangelical. Still others opt for the T.E.V. or the Living Bible.
But God is bigger than you are dear friend, and the Bible version which you must use is not a matter for you to decide according to your whims and prejudices. It has already been decided for you by the workings of God's special providence. If you ignore this providence and choose to adopt one of the modern versions, you will be taking the first step in the logic of unbelief. For the arguments which you must use to justify your choice are the same arguments which unbelievers use to justify theirs, the same method. If you adopt one of these modern versions, you must adopt the naturalistic New Testament textual criticism upon which it rests. In other words, naturalistic textual criticism regards the special, providential preservation of the Scriptures as of no importance for the study of the New Testament text. But if we concede this, then it follows that the infallible inspiration of the Scriptures is likewise unimportant. For why is it important that God should infallibly inspire the Scriptures, if it is not important that He should preserve them by His special providence?
Where, oh where, dear brother or sister, did you ever get the idea that it is up to you to decide which Bible version you will receive as God's holy Word? As long as you harbour this false notion, you are little better than an unbeliever. As long as you cherish this erroneous opinion, you are entirely on your own. For you the Bible has no authority, only that which your rebellious reason deigns to give it. For you there is no comfort, no assurance of faith. Cast off, therefore, this carnal mind that leads to death! Put on the spiritual mind that leads to life and peace! Receive by faith the true Text of God's Holy Word, which has been preserved down through the ages by His special providence and now is found in the Masoretic Hebrew text, the Greek Textus Receptus, and the King James Version and other faithful translations." (Ref: G4)
Click image below!
Click and read... The Battle for God's Word
NoticeThe Scripture verses on this web page; Slide mouse over to see popup of verses
Click for full chapter and verse rendering. Thanks to AV1611
Some servers do not use this function. We use Google Chrome works well.
Translation Without Inspiration is Extinction
by Dr. Thomas Cassidy
Presented at the
Dean Burgon Society Annual Meeting
Grayling, Michigan, July 1998
at
Calvary Baptist Church
Dr. Robert Barnett, Pastor
© Copyright 1998 by Thomas Cassidy, all rights assigned to the Dean Burgon Society.
The statement has often been made by critics of those who believe the texts which underlie the King James Bible are preserved and authoritative, that Dean Burgon believed the Textus Receptus was in need of revision, and if he were alive today he would not be a defender of the Textus Receptus. Even defenders of the King James Version, and of the Textus Receptus, seem to share such opinions. David Cloud, of Way of Life Literature, states in an article he wrote for O'Timothy Magazine: "While we don't believe the Received Text needs any correction whatsoever, and in that we would take exception to Burgon's position, we do commend his faith in the preservation of God's Word, which is in stark contrast with the skepticism of the hour." (David Cloud, THE ENGLISH OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE, O Timothy, Volume 11, Issue 6, 1994) Don't misunderstand me, David Cloud is a good man, and a strong defender of the King James Bible and the Traditional Texts which underlie it, however, I am of the opinion he may, like many others, have failed to fully understand Burgon's position on the Textus Receptus. I would like to address the issue of Dean Burgon's stand on the Greek New Testament, and compare that stand to the official stand of the Dean Burgon Society of today. There is no doubt that Dean Burgon made statements concerning the Textus Receptus, and its need for editing and revision. Edward Miller, writing in the Introduction (Page 5) of Dean Burgon's posthumously published "The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels" (Published by the Dean Burgon Society, 900 Park Avenue, Collingswood, New Jersey 08108) states "First, be it understood, that we do not advocate perfection in the Textus Receptus. We allow that here and there it requires revision." This statement, reiterated elsewhere in Dean Burgon's writings, begs the question, "Did Dean John William Burgon advocate revising the Textus Receptus, and if so, on what basis?" And, "What Greek Text would Dean Burgon advocate today as the preserved Greek text?" In order to properly answer these questions we need to look at some historical facts concerning the Greek text issue.
1. The Textus Receptus.
Just what is it and where did it come from? The term "Textus Receptus" was first used in the cover leaf of the 1633 edition of the Greek New Testament published by the Elzevir's to identity their New Testament as that which was "universally received" by the world of Christendom. However, the term "Textus Receptus" has come to mean any of the New Testament Texts compiled from the Byzantine Manuscripts from the time of Erasmus (who published 5 editions from 1516 through 1535), including the works of Stephanus (who published 4 editions from 1545 through 1551), and the works of Beza (who published 9 editions from 1565 through 1604) and the works of the Elzevirs, who published 7 editions from 1624 through 1678). The problem we encounter using the term "Textus Receptus" to refer to all of the above editions of the printed Greek New Testament is that they differ among themselves, some slightly, some to a much greater extent. It has often been said that the King James Bible is based on the 1550 edition of Stephanus, but, many of the King James readings come from the work of Tyndale (1526) which was based on the 1522 edition of Erasmus's Greek text. It was this 1522 edition which Stephanus used in 1546 as the basis for his works, including the 1550. It would seem that the Translation Committees also relied heavily on the 1598 edition of Beza. So, it can be easily demonstrated that the King James Bible does not slavishly follow any of the printed Greek texts collectively known as the "Textus Receptus" which were in usage in the early days of the 17th century.
Our King James Bible departs from every edition of the "Textus Receptus" to one extent or another. So we must ask ourselves, "Is the King James Bible based on the Textus Receptus, and if so, which edition? The answer is, no. The King James Bible is not based on any single edition of the Textus Receptus, but is based on the Traditional Texts as they have been Providentially preserved down through the ages of church and ecclesiastical history. It has often been charged by the proponents of the Critical Text position that Erasmus did not have access to the vast number of manuscripts available today, and thus confined his researches to a mere four or five Greek minuscules. This position, is, of course, contravened by historical fact. Erasmus was a man engaged continually in dissertation with other scholars and a man of wide-ranging personal correspondence, who traveled, visiting libraries and centers of learning and did all that was necessary to discover everything possible about the Bible which he loved. "He [Erasmus] was ever at work, visiting libraries, searching in every nook and corner for the profitable. He was ever collecting, comparing, writing and publishing. ... He classified the Greek manuscripts and read the Fathers." (David Otis Fuller, Is the KJV Nearest to the Original Autographs?) "By 1495 he [Erasmus] was studying in Paris. In 1499 he went to England where he made the helpful friendship of John Cabot, later dean of St. Paul's, who quickened his interest in biblical studies. He then went back to France and the Netherlands. In 1505 he again visited England and then passed three years in Italy. In 1509 he returned to England for the third time and taught at Cambridge University until 1514. In 1515 he went to Basel, where he published his New Testament in 1516, then back to the Netherlands for a sojourn at the University of Louvain. Then he returned to Basel in 1521 and remained there until 1529, in which year he removed to the imperial town of Freiburg-im-Breisgau. Finally, in 1535, he again returned to Basel and died there the following year in the midst of his Protestant friends, without relations of any sort, so far as known, with the Roman Catholic Church. "One might think that all this moving around would have interfered with Erasmus' activity as a scholar and writer, but quite the reverse is true. By his travels he was brought into contact with all the intellectual currents of his time and stimulated to almost superhuman efforts. He became the most famous scholar and author of his day and one of the most prolific writers of all time, his collected works filling ten large volumes in the Leclerc edition of 1705. As an editor also his productivity was tremendous. Ten columns of the catalog of the library in the British Museum are taken up with the bare enumeration of the works translated, edited, or annotated by Erasmus, and their subsequent reprints." (Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, pp. 195-197, referring to T.A. Dorey, Erasmus, London: Kegan Paul, 1970; Bainton, Erasmus of Christendom; W. Schwarz, Principles and Problems of Translation, Cambridge: University Press, 1955, pp. 92-166; Preserved Smith, Erasmus, New York: Harper, 1923). According to Dr. Edward F. Hills, the evidence points to the fact that Erasmus used other manuscripts beside five: "When Erasmus came to Basel in July 1515, to begin his work, he found five Greek New Testament manuscripts ready for his use. ... Did Erasmus use other manuscripts beside these five in preparing his Textus Receptus? The indications are that he did. According to W. Schwarz (1955), Erasmus made his own Latin translation of the New Testament at Oxford during the years 1505-6. His friend John Colet who had become Dean of St. Paul's, lent him two Latin manuscripts for this undertaking, but nothing is known about the Greek manuscripts which he used. He must have used some Greek manuscripts or other, however, and taken notes on them. Presumably therefore he brought these notes with him to Basel along with his translation and his comments on the New Testament text. It is well known also that Erasmus looked for manuscripts everywhere during his travels and that he borrowed them from everyone he could. Hence although the Textus Receptus was based mainly on the manuscripts which Erasmus found at Basel, it also included readings taken from others to which he had access. It agreed with the common faith because it was founded on manuscripts which in the providence of God were readily available." (Hills, p. 198.) "Nothing was more important at the dawn of the Reformation than the publication of the Testament of Jesus Christ in the original language. Never had Erasmus worked so carefully. 'If I told what sweat it cost me, no one would believe me.' He had collated many Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, and was surrounded by all the commentaries and translations, by the writings of Origen, Cyprian, Ambrose, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyril, Jerome, and Augustine. ... He had investigated the texts according to the principles of sacred criticism. When a knowledge of Hebrew was necessary, he had consulted Capito, and more particularly Cecolampadius. Nothing without Theseus, said he of the latter, making use of a Greek proverb." (J.H. Merle D'Aubigne, History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, New York: Hurst & Company, 1835, Vol. 5, p. 157.) So, it would seem that Erasmus, contrary to the position held by the proponents of the Critical Text, was a well traveled man, who had seen, studied, and ultimately rejected the very manuscripts which the Critical Text proponents consider "the best." He did so on the basis of the first hand, eye witness evidence of one who actually saw and read the manuscripts in questions, and recognized their inferiority.
2. Is the Textus Receptus identical to the Traditional Text?
Here is where the problem arises. No single edition of the Textus Receptus, available at the time of the translating of the King James Bible (1604-1611) is identical to the Traditional Text. Furthermore, no single edition of the Textus Receptus available to Dean Burgon was identical to the Traditional Text which underlies the King James Bible. And this is what produced the problem which Dean Burgon attempted to address. He believed, and rightly so, that no then-existing edition of the Textus Receptus conformed completely with the Traditional Text as embodied in the Byzantine Manuscript tradition. Thus, every Textus Receptus that the good Dean had available for his use was, in his opinion, in need of revision. 3. Is the Traditional Text best represented today by any single "Textus Receptus?" At the time of Dean Burgon's sudden death in 1888, no Textus Receptus was identical to the readings of the King James Bible, nor the Traditional or Byzantine Manuscript tradition. The Dean, in response to the need for an unassailable Greek Text in the Byzantine tradition, encouraged his colleague F.H.A. Scrivener, Prebendary of Exeter and Vicar of Hendon, to edit a Greek Text with textual apparatus which would show the textual basis for every word in the King James Bible New Testament. Mr. Scrivener began this work in 1881, largely spurred on by the publication of the Greek Text of the New Testament according to Westcott and Hort. Scrivener's final edition appeared in 1894, and continues to be published by the Trinitarian Bible Society today as the "Textus Receptus." In this publication, Scrivener states that he has managed to trace the origin of almost every word of the King James New Testament where it departs from the Textus Receptus (about 190 instances of varying degree if we use Beza's 1598 edition as the base line). Of these 190 instances, Scrivener was able to trace, working from a copy of the Translation Committee's notes found in the private library of the Secretary to the Final Revision Committee, all but about a dozen variants. The official minutes of those historic meetings were apparently destroyed in the London fire of 1629. However, in 1964 Professor Ward Allen found the papers of William Fulman, a 17th century collector, including a handwritten copy of John Bois's original notes in the Corpus Christi College Library at Oxford University, where they had lain since 1688. These notes have been published by Professor Allen under the title "Translating For King James," and are available from Vanderbilt University Press, 1969. We must note that Burgon called for 150 changes in the Textus Receptus in the Gospel of Matthew alone, while Scrivener made only about 250 changes in the entire New Testament. Does this fact suggest that Burgon would not accept Scriveners text? Perhaps not. Burgon's suggestion of 150 changes in the Gospel of Matthew may have included changes in the chapter and verse structure which was added to the Greek New Testament by Stephens. The anecdote has often been told that Stephens did much of his work while traveling on horse back, and the jolting may have caused more than one slip of the pen! This can be easily demonstrated by looking at Acts chapter 21 and 22. Chapter 21 does not complete the paragraph, or even the sentence! The chapter division comes right in the middle of the sentence which begins in 21:40 and ends in 22:1! Perhaps it was just such chapter and verse divisions which Burgon included in his 150 suggested changes. We can now see that even though Dean Burgon did call for a revision of the Textus Receptus as it existed in his day, the present Greek Text published by the Trinitarian Bible Society under the name "Textus Receptus" reflects the revision of the older Greek Texts which went by the same name, and now much more closely follows the manuscript tradition of the Traditional Texts of the Byzantine Manuscript Evidence. Today, the Dean Burgon Society believes the Textus Receptus, as published by the Trinitarian Bible Society, which is Scrivener's Greek Text of 1894, is the embodiment of the Providentially preserved word of God in Greek. As this Greek Text is the direct result of Dean Burgon's desire to see the Textus Receptus revised to more closely reflect the Traditional Text of the Byzantine Manuscripts, it is my assertion that the Dean, were he alive today, would agree with our position, and deem the Textus Receptus of today to be the authoritative Greek Text. Which brings us to our concluding point. What about those readings in the King James Bible which depart not only from the majority of Textus Receptus readings, but also from all known Greek manuscript evidence? Where do those readings come from, and how can their authority be confirmed? The title page to the original King James Version of 1611 contains the following statement: "The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Teftament, AND THE NEW:
Newly Tranflated out of the Originall tongues & with the former Tranflations deligently compared and reuifed by his Maiesties speciall Comandment."
It has been supposed that the reference to the "former translations" meant only the English translations of Tyndale and others. However, I believe, judging from the notes left by the Translation Committees, that this reference also includes the Vernaculars in Latin, Syriac, and the older European language Bibles used by the Waldenses, Vaudois, and other historic New Testament churches. It is this reliance on the oldest known vernaculars that has made the King James Bible so reliable, and able to meet every test of accuracy. The Old Latin and Old Peshitta were very early translations of the New Testament dating to as early as the mid-second century (about 150 A.D.). It has been noted that readings occur in the King James Bible that are without Greek manuscript support, and I believe those readings can be traced to the earliest known vernaculars, the Old Latin and Old Syriac Peshitta. Just because there is no Greek manuscript evidence available today does not mean such evidence never existed! The Old Latin and Old Syriac are strong indications that the readings in question are, in fact, authoritative, and being closest to the autographs, best reflect their readings. These vernacular readings are supported by the evidence from the early church Patriarchs, as well as from the Lexionaries, or daily scripture lessons read in the churches. It is unfortunate that the Critical Text proponents have failed to take this telling evidence into consideration, as it constitutes, in my opinion, the Best Evidence for the authority of these readings.
Think about it!
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. The Textus Receptus.
Just what is it and where did it come from? The term "Textus Receptus" was first used in the cover leaf of the 1633 edition of the Greek New Testament published by the Elzevir's to identity their New Testament as that which was "universally received" by the world of Christendom. However, the term "Textus Receptus" has come to mean any of the New Testament Texts compiled from the Byzantine Manuscripts from the time of Erasmus (who published 5 editions from 1516 through 1535), including the works of Stephanus (who published 4 editions from 1545 through 1551), and the works of Beza (who published 9 editions from 1565 through 1604) and the works of the Elzevirs, who published 7 editions from 1624 through 1678). The problem we encounter using the term "Textus Receptus" to refer to all of the above editions of the printed Greek New Testament is that they differ among themselves, some slightly, some to a much greater extent. It has often been said that the King James Bible is based on the 1550 edition of Stephanus, but, many of the King James readings come from the work of Tyndale (1526) which was based on the 1522 edition of Erasmus's Greek text. It was this 1522 edition which Stephanus used in 1546 as the basis for his works, including the 1550. It would seem that the Translation Committees also relied heavily on the 1598 edition of Beza. So, it can be easily demonstrated that the King James Bible does not slavishly follow any of the printed Greek texts collectively known as the "Textus Receptus" which were in usage in the early days of the 17th century.
Our King James Bible departs from every edition of the "Textus Receptus" to one extent or another. So we must ask ourselves, "Is the King James Bible based on the Textus Receptus, and if so, which edition? The answer is, no. The King James Bible is not based on any single edition of the Textus Receptus, but is based on the Traditional Texts as they have been Providentially preserved down through the ages of church and ecclesiastical history. It has often been charged by the proponents of the Critical Text position that Erasmus did not have access to the vast number of manuscripts available today, and thus confined his researches to a mere four or five Greek minuscules. This position, is, of course, contravened by historical fact. Erasmus was a man engaged continually in dissertation with other scholars and a man of wide-ranging personal correspondence, who traveled, visiting libraries and centers of learning and did all that was necessary to discover everything possible about the Bible which he loved. "He [Erasmus] was ever at work, visiting libraries, searching in every nook and corner for the profitable. He was ever collecting, comparing, writing and publishing. ... He classified the Greek manuscripts and read the Fathers." (David Otis Fuller, Is the KJV Nearest to the Original Autographs?) "By 1495 he [Erasmus] was studying in Paris. In 1499 he went to England where he made the helpful friendship of John Cabot, later dean of St. Paul's, who quickened his interest in biblical studies. He then went back to France and the Netherlands. In 1505 he again visited England and then passed three years in Italy. In 1509 he returned to England for the third time and taught at Cambridge University until 1514. In 1515 he went to Basel, where he published his New Testament in 1516, then back to the Netherlands for a sojourn at the University of Louvain. Then he returned to Basel in 1521 and remained there until 1529, in which year he removed to the imperial town of Freiburg-im-Breisgau. Finally, in 1535, he again returned to Basel and died there the following year in the midst of his Protestant friends, without relations of any sort, so far as known, with the Roman Catholic Church. "One might think that all this moving around would have interfered with Erasmus' activity as a scholar and writer, but quite the reverse is true. By his travels he was brought into contact with all the intellectual currents of his time and stimulated to almost superhuman efforts. He became the most famous scholar and author of his day and one of the most prolific writers of all time, his collected works filling ten large volumes in the Leclerc edition of 1705. As an editor also his productivity was tremendous. Ten columns of the catalog of the library in the British Museum are taken up with the bare enumeration of the works translated, edited, or annotated by Erasmus, and their subsequent reprints." (Edward F. Hills, The King James Version Defended, pp. 195-197, referring to T.A. Dorey, Erasmus, London: Kegan Paul, 1970; Bainton, Erasmus of Christendom; W. Schwarz, Principles and Problems of Translation, Cambridge: University Press, 1955, pp. 92-166; Preserved Smith, Erasmus, New York: Harper, 1923). According to Dr. Edward F. Hills, the evidence points to the fact that Erasmus used other manuscripts beside five: "When Erasmus came to Basel in July 1515, to begin his work, he found five Greek New Testament manuscripts ready for his use. ... Did Erasmus use other manuscripts beside these five in preparing his Textus Receptus? The indications are that he did. According to W. Schwarz (1955), Erasmus made his own Latin translation of the New Testament at Oxford during the years 1505-6. His friend John Colet who had become Dean of St. Paul's, lent him two Latin manuscripts for this undertaking, but nothing is known about the Greek manuscripts which he used. He must have used some Greek manuscripts or other, however, and taken notes on them. Presumably therefore he brought these notes with him to Basel along with his translation and his comments on the New Testament text. It is well known also that Erasmus looked for manuscripts everywhere during his travels and that he borrowed them from everyone he could. Hence although the Textus Receptus was based mainly on the manuscripts which Erasmus found at Basel, it also included readings taken from others to which he had access. It agreed with the common faith because it was founded on manuscripts which in the providence of God were readily available." (Hills, p. 198.) "Nothing was more important at the dawn of the Reformation than the publication of the Testament of Jesus Christ in the original language. Never had Erasmus worked so carefully. 'If I told what sweat it cost me, no one would believe me.' He had collated many Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, and was surrounded by all the commentaries and translations, by the writings of Origen, Cyprian, Ambrose, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyril, Jerome, and Augustine. ... He had investigated the texts according to the principles of sacred criticism. When a knowledge of Hebrew was necessary, he had consulted Capito, and more particularly Cecolampadius. Nothing without Theseus, said he of the latter, making use of a Greek proverb." (J.H. Merle D'Aubigne, History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, New York: Hurst & Company, 1835, Vol. 5, p. 157.) So, it would seem that Erasmus, contrary to the position held by the proponents of the Critical Text, was a well traveled man, who had seen, studied, and ultimately rejected the very manuscripts which the Critical Text proponents consider "the best." He did so on the basis of the first hand, eye witness evidence of one who actually saw and read the manuscripts in questions, and recognized their inferiority.
2. Is the Textus Receptus identical to the Traditional Text?
Here is where the problem arises. No single edition of the Textus Receptus, available at the time of the translating of the King James Bible (1604-1611) is identical to the Traditional Text. Furthermore, no single edition of the Textus Receptus available to Dean Burgon was identical to the Traditional Text which underlies the King James Bible. And this is what produced the problem which Dean Burgon attempted to address. He believed, and rightly so, that no then-existing edition of the Textus Receptus conformed completely with the Traditional Text as embodied in the Byzantine Manuscript tradition. Thus, every Textus Receptus that the good Dean had available for his use was, in his opinion, in need of revision. 3. Is the Traditional Text best represented today by any single "Textus Receptus?" At the time of Dean Burgon's sudden death in 1888, no Textus Receptus was identical to the readings of the King James Bible, nor the Traditional or Byzantine Manuscript tradition. The Dean, in response to the need for an unassailable Greek Text in the Byzantine tradition, encouraged his colleague F.H.A. Scrivener, Prebendary of Exeter and Vicar of Hendon, to edit a Greek Text with textual apparatus which would show the textual basis for every word in the King James Bible New Testament. Mr. Scrivener began this work in 1881, largely spurred on by the publication of the Greek Text of the New Testament according to Westcott and Hort. Scrivener's final edition appeared in 1894, and continues to be published by the Trinitarian Bible Society today as the "Textus Receptus." In this publication, Scrivener states that he has managed to trace the origin of almost every word of the King James New Testament where it departs from the Textus Receptus (about 190 instances of varying degree if we use Beza's 1598 edition as the base line). Of these 190 instances, Scrivener was able to trace, working from a copy of the Translation Committee's notes found in the private library of the Secretary to the Final Revision Committee, all but about a dozen variants. The official minutes of those historic meetings were apparently destroyed in the London fire of 1629. However, in 1964 Professor Ward Allen found the papers of William Fulman, a 17th century collector, including a handwritten copy of John Bois's original notes in the Corpus Christi College Library at Oxford University, where they had lain since 1688. These notes have been published by Professor Allen under the title "Translating For King James," and are available from Vanderbilt University Press, 1969. We must note that Burgon called for 150 changes in the Textus Receptus in the Gospel of Matthew alone, while Scrivener made only about 250 changes in the entire New Testament. Does this fact suggest that Burgon would not accept Scriveners text? Perhaps not. Burgon's suggestion of 150 changes in the Gospel of Matthew may have included changes in the chapter and verse structure which was added to the Greek New Testament by Stephens. The anecdote has often been told that Stephens did much of his work while traveling on horse back, and the jolting may have caused more than one slip of the pen! This can be easily demonstrated by looking at Acts chapter 21 and 22. Chapter 21 does not complete the paragraph, or even the sentence! The chapter division comes right in the middle of the sentence which begins in 21:40 and ends in 22:1! Perhaps it was just such chapter and verse divisions which Burgon included in his 150 suggested changes. We can now see that even though Dean Burgon did call for a revision of the Textus Receptus as it existed in his day, the present Greek Text published by the Trinitarian Bible Society under the name "Textus Receptus" reflects the revision of the older Greek Texts which went by the same name, and now much more closely follows the manuscript tradition of the Traditional Texts of the Byzantine Manuscript Evidence. Today, the Dean Burgon Society believes the Textus Receptus, as published by the Trinitarian Bible Society, which is Scrivener's Greek Text of 1894, is the embodiment of the Providentially preserved word of God in Greek. As this Greek Text is the direct result of Dean Burgon's desire to see the Textus Receptus revised to more closely reflect the Traditional Text of the Byzantine Manuscripts, it is my assertion that the Dean, were he alive today, would agree with our position, and deem the Textus Receptus of today to be the authoritative Greek Text. Which brings us to our concluding point. What about those readings in the King James Bible which depart not only from the majority of Textus Receptus readings, but also from all known Greek manuscript evidence? Where do those readings come from, and how can their authority be confirmed? The title page to the original King James Version of 1611 contains the following statement: "The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Teftament, AND THE NEW:
Newly Tranflated out of the Originall tongues & with the former Tranflations deligently compared and reuifed by his Maiesties speciall Comandment."
It has been supposed that the reference to the "former translations" meant only the English translations of Tyndale and others. However, I believe, judging from the notes left by the Translation Committees, that this reference also includes the Vernaculars in Latin, Syriac, and the older European language Bibles used by the Waldenses, Vaudois, and other historic New Testament churches. It is this reliance on the oldest known vernaculars that has made the King James Bible so reliable, and able to meet every test of accuracy. The Old Latin and Old Peshitta were very early translations of the New Testament dating to as early as the mid-second century (about 150 A.D.). It has been noted that readings occur in the King James Bible that are without Greek manuscript support, and I believe those readings can be traced to the earliest known vernaculars, the Old Latin and Old Syriac Peshitta. Just because there is no Greek manuscript evidence available today does not mean such evidence never existed! The Old Latin and Old Syriac are strong indications that the readings in question are, in fact, authoritative, and being closest to the autographs, best reflect their readings. These vernacular readings are supported by the evidence from the early church Patriarchs, as well as from the Lexionaries, or daily scripture lessons read in the churches. It is unfortunate that the Critical Text proponents have failed to take this telling evidence into consideration, as it constitutes, in my opinion, the Best Evidence for the authority of these readings.
Think about it!
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
The King James Version Defended
Which Translation Should You Trust by Timothy S. Morton
Please Click and read each of the following:
In Defense of the King James Bible
INFORMATION WARFARE IN THE SPIRITUAL WARFARE OVER
GOD'S HOLY WORD
The Origin of King James Only-ism
The Superiority of the King James Bible
The Burning of William Tyndale
The Bible Forever Settled in Heaven
A Brief History of the King James Bible
God Only Wrote One Bible By Jasper Ray
God Only Wrote One Book by David Otis Fuller
One Book Stands Alone by David Otis Fuller
What the Bible Says is So by Pastor Jack Thompson
The New International PerVersion by Dr. Terry Watkins
The Two Text Lines
or the two streams from which all bibles have come.
Only the King James Bible is God's absolute truth, from the Traditional line of text!
or the two streams from which all bibles have come.
Only the King James Bible is God's absolute truth, from the Traditional line of text!
See how they have changed the text to corrupt the Word of God.
Follow The Two Streams
From the Baptist Board.Com
I am amazed at the spirit of your response to my post. Is the intent of your post to imply that God has not preserved His Words as He promised? Call me naive, but I believe the promises of scripture. One cannot approach the scriptures without the eye of faith. I believe I am saved by faith. I believe God's Word is true by faith. I believe God has preserved His words by faith. A carnal mind is enmity against God. If you really want to know...........
1. Psalms 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. (7) Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
2. Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
3. Psalms 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
Notice the quote of the DBS position:
"The following doctrinal statement testifying to various historical churches' belief in the providential preservation of the original language texts of Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek is found virtually word for word in the following Historic Confessions: (1) The London Baptist Confession of 1677 and 1689; (2) the Philadelphia Baptist Confession of about 1743; (3) the Westminster Confession of 1646; (4) and the Savoy Confession of 1652. The wording from the LONDON BAPTIST CONFESSION of 1689 is:
8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old,) and the New Testament in Greek, (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, AND BY HIS SINGULAR, CARE AND PROVIDENCE KEPT PURE IN ALL AGES, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them 13. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read16 and search them,17 therefore, they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come,18 that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship Him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.19.
(Chapter I, "OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES" "8," pp. 9-10 of "Things Most Surely Believed Among Us--The BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH OF 1689"; Evangelical Press, 136 Rosendale Road, London, S.E.21.)"
The TR only position is one of historical as well as doctrinal integrity. God has not, as you seem to imply preserved His words with 'various words.' He either preserved them for us, or He didn't. Providential preservation does not mean that transmission errors did not occur. The plan of God is that he has used His people to transmit faithfully the text.
Note the following from my close friend, Dr. H.D. Williams:
"The mechanisms for the preservation of the Words of God are recorded for us in many passages of Scripture. Many people are surprised by this insight. The mechanisms include literal as well as providential means. The first step of preservation was to "write" His Words in a book. [Exodus 17:4, Exodus 34:27; Num. 5:23; Deut. 31:24; Jos. 23:6; Isa. 8:1, Isa. 30:8; Jer. 30:2; Rev. 1:19] It is very interesting that "written in the (or this) book" occurs 93 times.
Second, His Words are written in many books. [Acts 1:20, Acts 7:42, Acts 13:33, Acts 15:15, Acts 24:13; Matt. 5:17, Matt. 23:35 ]
Third, all His Words were commanded to be written. [Ex. 24:3-4; Deut. 9:10, Deut. 27:3; Jer. 30:2-4]
Fourth, copies of all His Words were to be made. [Deut. 10:2-4; Deut. 17:8, Deut. 27:3; Jos. 8:32; Jere. 25:13, Jere. 36:2,
Jere. 36:28, Jere. 6:32, Jere. 51:60; Psalms 40:7, Psalms 102:12-18]
Fifth, the Words were to be read. [Ex. 24:7; Deut. 17:19; Jos. 8:34; 2 Kings 23:2, 2Chron. 34:30; Jer. 36:6-10] The Hebrew word, Kara, used in all these passages also means to proclaim, publish, and preach the Words.
Sixth, all generations have been com- manded to keep (guard, protect, preserve, observe) the Words. [Ex. 15:26, Ex. 20:5-6; Lev. 18:4-5; Deut. 29:9; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings. 17:13; 2 Chron. 34:31; Nehe. 1:9; Eccl. 12:13; Ezek. 11:20; Dan. 9:4; John. 14:15-23]
Seven, all generations have been com- manded to keep the Words on their hearts. [Deut. 6:6-9; Prov. 3:3; Psa. 40:8, Psalms 119:11; Jer. 31:33; Mat. 28:19-20; Jn. 14: 15, 21] This also means to understand them well enough to teach them, particularly to children.
Eight, individuals should recognize that God’s Words are specific as to the mech- anisms already presented, and those to follow. This specificity should be recognized just like Biblical facts are recognized and appreciated. [Ezek. 13:9, Ezek. 24:2, Ezek. 43:11; Dan. 5:24-25; Dan. 9:13; Hos. 8:12; Mic. 2:5; Matt. 21:13; John 12:6]
Nine, the phrase "it is written"occurs 93 times in the Bible, and invariably it means the Words were written in the past and are still present now and in the future. [Dr. D. A. Waite, Defending the King James Bible, pp. 9-11; and Kent Brandenburg, Editor, Thou shalt Keep Them, David Sutton, p. 75-81]
Ten, God guaranteed the preservation of the covenant, His Words. [Ex. 24:7; Deut. 7:9, Deut. 33:9; 1 Chron. 16:15; Psa. 12:6-7, Psalms 89:34, Psalms 105:8; Matt. 4:4, Matt. 5:17-18, Matt. 24:35; 1 Pet. 1:23-25]
Eleven, The Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit were the means for man to receive the Words, which were recorded.
[John. 3: 31-33, John 5:34, John 7:38-39, John 12:47-48, John 14:17, John 16:13-14, John 17:8, John 20:22; 2 Tim. 3:15-17]
Twelve, "God gave responsibility of preservation of the Old Testament to Israel." [Thou Shalt Keep Them, p. 104] [Gen. 17:9-10; Ex. 20:6; Deut. 6:6-9; Isa. 26:2; Acts 7:38; Rom. 3:1-2, Rom. 9:3-5]
Thirteen, the Old Testament saints were to keep the Words in the tabernacle or temple, their place of worship. [Deut. 31:26,
Deut. 34:30; 2 Kings 23:2]
Fourteen, in the New Testament times, the members of the churches were to go, to keep (observe, protect, guard, and preserve), to teach, to receive, and to recognize His Words. [Matt. 28:19-20; John. 10:27, John 17:8, John 14:21, John 15:20; 1 Cor. 7:19; Gal. 2:5; 2 Tim. 2:24-26; Tit. 3:10; 1 Jn 3:22-24; Rev. 1:3, Rev. 14:12, Rev. 12:17; Rev. 22:7, Rev.22:9, Rev. 22:18-19].
Fifteen, our local church is to be "the pillar and ground of the truth." [1 Tim. 3:15]
Sixteen, believers in the churches are to be the stewards of God’s Words. [1Tim. 1:11, 1Tim. 1:18-20, 1Tim. 4:6-16; 1 Cor. 4:1-2; Eph. 3:9] [Many of the preceding concepts were obtained from Thou shalt Keep Them.]
The New Testament era has an even better way for preservation of God’s Words than the Old Testament times. Dr. Jack Moorman sums up the present era’s preservation of the Scripture by saying, "Just as the divine glories of the New Testament are brighter far than the glories of the Old Testament, so the manner in which God has preserved the New Testament Text is far more wonderful than the manner in which He preserved the Old Testament text. God preserved the Old Testament text by means of something physical and external, namely, the Aaronic priesthood. God has preserved the New Testament text by means of something inward and spiritual, namely, the universal priesthood of believers." [Dr. Jack Moorman, Forever Settled, [DBS #1428] 1999, p. 62]
Yes, the churches, which are filled with Bible believing saints are responsible for "keeping" the Words of God; and they have done it. There has been a record of independent churches who were filled with the priesthood of believers throughout the centuries. There are many authors who would dispute this fact, and they would argue that individuals within the churches wrote fraudulent books to counter other ideologies seeking dominance. [Bart Ehrman, Lost Christianities, p. 203-227]. The truth about these authors, however, is that they use speculation, theory, and circumstantial evidence. The truth is that a born-again believer sealed with the Holy Spirit could not knowingly change even one jot or tittle of Scripture.
There has been a continuous presence of independent Bible believing churches that have preserved the text. Much evidence of the existence of these churches has been provided in books such as Alexis Muston’s, The Israel of the Alps, A History of the Waldenses published in 1875. Muston writes, "In the first centuries of the Christian era, each church founded by the disciples of Christ had a unity and an independence of its own. They were united by the same faith, but that faith was not imposed by authority upon any one." [p. 4] He proceeds to discuss briefly the concept of the formation of the state-church under Constantine, but acknowledges the persistence of independent churches. He even states that Ambrose (339-397 A.D.) "did not acknow- ledge any authority on earth superior to that of the Bible." [p. 5] In the 6th century, Muston relates the story of nine pastors who "separated themselves from the Roman Church, or rather they solemnly renewed the protestation of their independence of it." [p. 7] He quoted a 7th century a pastor in Milan: "To combat the opinion that the pope is head of the church, he directs attention to the fact that the Councils of Nice, Constantinople, Chalcedon, and many others, had been convoked by the emperors, and not by the pope." [p. 8] Muston relates "the resistance [to the papal see] also becoming more vigorous in the following centuries, and we can follow its traces quite on to the 12th century, when the existence of the Vaudois [Waldensians] is no longer doubted by anybody." [p.8] He reports that "the Kingdom of Lombardy itself was solicitous for the preservation of this independence." He says, "thus the doctrines which characterized the primitive [apostolic] church and which still characterized the Vaudois Church at the present day [the 1870's], have never remained without a witness in the countries inhabited by the Vaudois; and if men had been silent, the Bible would have spoken." [p.9] The Bible has spoken and the evidence for the preservation of God’s Words is over- whelming. God’s precious Words have been preserved in the New Testament era by the mechanisms announced in Scripture, and independent churches still honor, revere, protect, guard, and defend the very Words of the Living God. The Dean Burgon Society was formed to assist the churches to defend, guard, protect, and keep the Words of the Living God.
During the early centuries, corruptions arose, but independent churches still con- tinued to flourish. G. H. Orchard says, "During the rise and growth of these corruptions, the churches for three centuries remained as originally formed, independent of each other, and were united by no tie but that of charity." [G. H. Orchard, A Concise History of the Baptists, Chapter 1, Section III.4] "During the first three centuries, Christian congregations, all over the East, subsisted in separate independent bodies, unsupported by government, and conse- quently without any secular power over one another." [Orchard, Chapter 1, Section III.7]
By the fourth century, groups of independent churches formed to resist the corruption of centralized power, wrong discipline, wrong doctrine, and the wrong philosophical influences of neo-Platonists in Alexandria, Egypt, that led men like Pantaneus, Ammonius Saccas, and Origen, to reject the Scriptures as written. The Alexandrian center of apostasy is very likely the source of the modernist textual critics’ favorite manuscripts, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. The independent groups that were formed to resist these encroachments on apostolic doctrine were maligned by Rome and derogatorily called "Puritans."
G. H. Orchard says,"One Novatus, of Carthage, coming to Rome, united himself with Novatian, and their combined efforts were attended with remarkable success. It is evident that many persons were previously in such a situation as to embrace the earliest opportunity of uniting with churches whose communion was scriptural. Novatian became the first pastor in the new interest, and is accused of the crime of giving birth to an innumerable multitude of congregations of Puritans in every part of the Roman empire; and yet ...these churches flourished until the fifth century. . . . The churches thus formed upon a plan of strict communion and rigid discipline, obtained the reproach of Puritans; they were the oldest body of Christian churches, of which we have any account, and a succession of them, we shall prove, has continued to the present day. Novatian’s example had a powerful influence, and Puritan churches rose in different parts, in quick succession. So early as 254, these Dissenters [from Rome] are complained of, as having infected France with their doctrines, [Mezeray’s Hist., p. 4. Miln. Ch. Hist., c. 3, c. 13] which will aid us in the Albigensian churches, where the same severity of discipline is traced, [Allix’s Pied, c. 17, 156] and reprobated." [Orchard, Chapter 2, Section 1] [All emphases are mine.]
The influence of these independent churches would be felt through the dark ages and into the Reformation. It is a well known fact that the men of the Reformation were influenced by members of the Waldensian churches. It was the independent Waldensian churches which supplied the manuscripts that Erasmus et al. used to print the first Traditional or Received Text. The evidence of preservation provided by translations into other languages, lectionaries, the writings of church fathers, and manuscripts is enormous. The independent, believer churches have preserved, guarded, and protected the Words of God as commanded. Will we continue? Are we still able to defend the Truth AGAINST ALL THREATS, and as my Pastor says, against the GOLIATHS?"
Dr. Thomas Stouse, said "The omniscient Lord Jesus, Who is the Truth (Jn. 14:6), never questioned the pure Words of the truth of the preserved OT (Prov. 30:5-6; Ps. 19:9), referred to the OT as truth (Mk 12:14; Lk. 4:25; Jn. 17:17), and bore witness to the truth (Jn. 16:7; 18:37). To suggest that the Lord’s view on the inerrancy of the OT was an “errant inerrancy” position of inspired and preserved errors (“typos’) is not only an example of blatant Neo-Orthodoxy but of horrific blasphemy."
Dr. Jefreey Khoo stated, "The 19th century Warfieldian concept of the inerrant autographa as reflected in contemporary evangelicalism ought to be expanded to include the infallible apographa. According to Richard Muller of Calvin Theological Seminary, "The Protestant scholastics do not press the point made by their nineteenth-century followers that the infallibility of Scripture and the freedom of Scripture from error reside absolutely in the autographa, and only in the derivative sense in the apographa; rather, the scholastics argue positively that the apographa preserve intact the true words of the prophets and the apostles and that the God-breathed (theopneustos) character of Scripture is manifest in the apographa as well as in the autographa. In other words, the issue primarily addressed by the seventeenth-century orthodox in their discussion of the autographa is the continuity of the extant copies in Hebrew and in Greek with the originals both quoad res, with respect to the thing or subject of the text, and quoad verba, with respect to the words of the text." It is quite clear that the Reformation scholars believed in the 100% inspiration and 100% preservation of the very words of Scripture that God has breathed out, and not simply the doctrines (2 Tim 3:16, Ps 12:6-7, Matt 5:18, Matt 24:35). Without the words, where the doctrines? It must be pointed out that the current neo-evangelical and neo-fundamental view of (1) verbal inspiration and total inerrancy in the autographs per se, and (2) conceptual inspiredness and limited inerrancy in the apographs contradicts reformed and fundamental dogmatics."
I close with a notable quote from Dean Burgon himself,
"I hear some one say,—It seems to trouble you very much that inspired writers should be thought capable of making mistakes; but it does not trouble me.—Very like not. It does not trouble you, perhaps, to see stone after stone, buttress after buttress, foundation after foundation, removed from the walls of Zion, until the whole structure trembles and totters, and is pronounced insecure. Your boasted unconcern is very little to the purpose, unless we may also know how dear to you the safety of Zion is. But if you make indignant answer,—(as would heaven you may!)—that your care for GOD’s honour, your jealousy for GOD’s oracles, is every whit as great as our own,—then we tell you that, on your wretched promises, men more logical than yourself will make shipwreck of their peace, and endanger their very souls. There is no stopping,—no knowing where to stop,—in this downward course. Once admit the principle of fallibility into the inspired Word, and the whole becomes a bruised and rotten reed. If St. Paul a little, why not St. Paul much? If Moses in some places, why not in many? You will doubt our LORD’s infallibility next! … It might not trouble you, to find your own familiar friend telling you a lie, every now and then: but I trust this whole congregation will share the preacher’s infirmity, while he confesses that it would trouble him so exceedingly that after one established falsehood, he would feel unable ever to trust that friend implicitly again."
Hope this helps...
Great Sermons of the Past
Use the Tab Key or Back Arrow at top of page to return to this site!
C. H. Spurgeon Sermons
C. H. Spurgeon Sermons
A Free Grace Promise Joel 2:32
Free Salvation Isaiah 55:1
A Faithful Friend Proverbs 18:24
A Greater than Solomon Luke 11:31
Abiding of the Spirit the Glory of the Church Haggai 2:4-5
Adoption - The Spirit and the Cry Galatians 4:6
All Fullness in Christ Colossians 1:19
A Mighty Savior Isaiah 63:1
Are You Prepared to Die? Jeremiah 12:5
Ascension of Christ Ephesians 4:7-12
Believing on Jesus, and Its Counterfeits John 8:30-32
Believing Thief Luke 23:42-43
Betrayal Luke 22:47-48
Blessing of Full Assurance 1 John 5:13
Blind Beggar Mark 10:46-52
Blood, The Exodus 12:13
Blood of the Covenant Hebrews 13:20-21
Blood of Jesus, Voice of the Hebrews 12:24
Blood of the Everlasting Covenant (Hebrews 13:20)
Gethsemane Luke 22:44
Glorious Gospel 1 Timothy 1:15
Glorious Habitation Psalm 90:10
Glorious Predestination Romans 8:29
Grace Abounding Hosea 14:4
Heart of the Gospel 2 Corinthians 5:20-21
Heaven 1 Corinthians 2:9-10
His Name - The Counselor Isaiah 9:6
His Name - Mighty God Isaiah 9:6
Holy Spirit, Grieving the Ephesians 4:30
Holy Spirit's Intercession Romans 8:26-27
Holy Spirit, Outpouring of Acts 10:44
Holy Spirit, Personality of the John 14:16-17
Holy Spirit, Power of the Romans 15:13
Holy Spirit--the Great Teacher John 16:13
Holy Spirit, Work of the Galatians 3:3
How to Read the Bible Matthew 12:3-7
I Know that My Redeemer Lives Job 19:25-27
Immeasurable Love John 3:16
Immutability of Christ Hebrews 13:8
Immutability of God Malachi 3:6
Incarnation and Birth of Christ Micah 5:2
Indwelling Sin Job 40:3-4
In Him, Like Him 1 John 2:6
Jacob and Esau Romans 9:15
Jehovah Tsidkenu: The Lord Our Righteousness Jeremiah 23:6
Jesus About His Father's Business John 4:34
Jesus Only Matthew 17:8
Joy Born at Bethlehem Luke 2:10-12
Justice Satisfied Romans 3:26 1 John 1:9
Justification by Faith Romans 3:24
Justification by Faith Illustrated by Abram’s Righteousness Genesis 15:6
Free Salvation Isaiah 55:1
A Faithful Friend Proverbs 18:24
A Greater than Solomon Luke 11:31
Abiding of the Spirit the Glory of the Church Haggai 2:4-5
Adoption - The Spirit and the Cry Galatians 4:6
All Fullness in Christ Colossians 1:19
A Mighty Savior Isaiah 63:1
Are You Prepared to Die? Jeremiah 12:5
Ascension of Christ Ephesians 4:7-12
Believing on Jesus, and Its Counterfeits John 8:30-32
Believing Thief Luke 23:42-43
Betrayal Luke 22:47-48
Blessing of Full Assurance 1 John 5:13
Blind Beggar Mark 10:46-52
Blood, The Exodus 12:13
Blood of the Covenant Hebrews 13:20-21
Blood of Jesus, Voice of the Hebrews 12:24
Blood of the Everlasting Covenant (Hebrews 13:20)
Gethsemane Luke 22:44
Glorious Gospel 1 Timothy 1:15
Glorious Habitation Psalm 90:10
Glorious Predestination Romans 8:29
Grace Abounding Hosea 14:4
Heart of the Gospel 2 Corinthians 5:20-21
Heaven 1 Corinthians 2:9-10
His Name - The Counselor Isaiah 9:6
His Name - Mighty God Isaiah 9:6
Holy Spirit, Grieving the Ephesians 4:30
Holy Spirit's Intercession Romans 8:26-27
Holy Spirit, Outpouring of Acts 10:44
Holy Spirit, Personality of the John 14:16-17
Holy Spirit, Power of the Romans 15:13
Holy Spirit--the Great Teacher John 16:13
Holy Spirit, Work of the Galatians 3:3
How to Read the Bible Matthew 12:3-7
I Know that My Redeemer Lives Job 19:25-27
Immeasurable Love John 3:16
Immutability of Christ Hebrews 13:8
Immutability of God Malachi 3:6
Incarnation and Birth of Christ Micah 5:2
Indwelling Sin Job 40:3-4
In Him, Like Him 1 John 2:6
Jacob and Esau Romans 9:15
Jehovah Tsidkenu: The Lord Our Righteousness Jeremiah 23:6
Jesus About His Father's Business John 4:34
Jesus Only Matthew 17:8
Joy Born at Bethlehem Luke 2:10-12
Justice Satisfied Romans 3:26 1 John 1:9
Justification by Faith Romans 3:24
Justification by Faith Illustrated by Abram’s Righteousness Genesis 15:6
Horatius Bonar Sermons
The Everlasting Righteousness
God's Answer to Man's Question
God's Recognition of Substitution
The Completeness of the Substitution
The Declaration of the Completeness
Righteousness for the Unrighteousness
Righteousness of God Reckoned to Us
Not Faith, but Christ
What the Resurrection of the Substitute Has Done
Pardon and Peace Made Sure
The Holy Life of the Justified
The Saint and Romans Seven
The Everlasting Righteousness
God's Answer to Man's Question
God's Recognition of Substitution
The Completeness of the Substitution
The Declaration of the Completeness
Righteousness for the Unrighteousness
Righteousness of God Reckoned to Us
Not Faith, but Christ
What the Resurrection of the Substitute Has Done
Pardon and Peace Made Sure
The Holy Life of the Justified
The Saint and Romans Seven
Edward M. Bounds SermonsThe Necessity of Prayer
1. Prayer and Faith
2.Prayer and Faith (continued)
3. Prayer and Trust
4. Prayer and Desire
5. Prayer and Fervency
Holiness by J. C. Ryle
The Nature of Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
The Visible Evidences of Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
Distinguishing Between Justification and Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
Practical Applications of the Doctrine of Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
Profitable Bible Study by R. A. Torrey
The Secret of Abiding Peace by R. A. Torrey
The Old Testament Messianic Hope by H. P. Liddon
Christ the end of the Law by C. H. Spurgeon
1. Prayer and Faith
2.Prayer and Faith (continued)
3. Prayer and Trust
4. Prayer and Desire
5. Prayer and Fervency
Holiness by J. C. Ryle
The Nature of Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
The Visible Evidences of Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
Distinguishing Between Justification and Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
Practical Applications of the Doctrine of Sanctification by J. C. Ryle
Profitable Bible Study by R. A. Torrey
The Secret of Abiding Peace by R. A. Torrey
The Old Testament Messianic Hope by H. P. Liddon
Christ the end of the Law by C. H. Spurgeon
Mysterious Visits
Under His Shadow
Under the Apple Tree
Over the Mountains
Fragrant Spices from the Mountains of Myrrh
The Well-beloved
The Spiced Wine of the Pomegranate
The Well-Beloved's Vineyard
Redeemed Souls Freed from Fear
Jesus, the Great Object of Our Astonishment
Bands of Love; or Union to Christ
"I Will Give You Rest"
The Memorable Hymn
Jesus Asleep on a Pillow
Real Contact with Jesus
Christ and His Table-Companions
A Word from the Beloved's Own Mouth
Believer, Not an Orphan
Communion with Christ and His People
The Sin Bearer
Swooning and Reviving at Christ's Feet
C. H. Spurgeon's Communion Hymn
Christ the End of the Law
Christ the Conqueror of Satan
Under His Shadow
Under the Apple Tree
Over the Mountains
Fragrant Spices from the Mountains of Myrrh
The Well-beloved
The Spiced Wine of the Pomegranate
The Well-Beloved's Vineyard
Redeemed Souls Freed from Fear
Jesus, the Great Object of Our Astonishment
Bands of Love; or Union to Christ
"I Will Give You Rest"
The Memorable Hymn
Jesus Asleep on a Pillow
Real Contact with Jesus
Christ and His Table-Companions
A Word from the Beloved's Own Mouth
Believer, Not an Orphan
Communion with Christ and His People
The Sin Bearer
Swooning and Reviving at Christ's Feet
C. H. Spurgeon's Communion Hymn
Christ the End of the Law
Christ the Conqueror of Satan
Individual Writings by Spurgeon
A Defense of Calvinism by C. H. Spurgeon
All of Grace by C. H. Spurgeon
All Fullness in Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
The Approachableness of Jesus by C. H. Spurgeon
The Ascension of Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
A View of God's Glory by C. H. Spurgeon
Blood, The by C. H. Spurgeon
Lifting Up the Brazen Serpent by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ About His Father's Business by C. H. Spurgeon
Christian Conversion by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ is All by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ is All (2) by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ in the Covenant by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Crucified by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Exalted by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Lifted Up by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Our Passover by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ—The Power and Wisdom of God by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ's Prayer for His People by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ's Resurrection and Our Newness of Life by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Our Substitute by C. H. Spurgeon
The Compassion of Christ, C. H. Spurgeon
Condescension of Christ, C. H. Spurgeon
Consolation in Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Death of Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Death and Life in Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Death of Jesus Christ for His People by C. H. Spurgeon
Doctrines of Grace Do Not Lead to Sin by C. H. Spurgeon
Election by C. H. Spurgeon
Essential Points In Prayer by C. H. Spurgeon
Faith by C. H. Spurgeon
Fruitless Vine by C. H. Spurgeon
Justification by Faith by C. H. Spurgeon
Man's Ruin and God's Remedy by C. H. Spurgeon
One Greater than the Temple by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Compassionate High Priest by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Expectation by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Glorious Transforming by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Lord's Prayer for His People's Sanctification by C. H. Spurgeon
Salvation Altogether by Grace by C. H. Spurgeon
Shed Blood of Jesus Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Sin and Grace by C. H. Spurgeon
Sin Laid on Jesus by C. H. Spurgeon
Sovereign Grace and Man's Responsibility by C. H. Spurgeon
Sovereignty and Salvation by C. H. Spurgeon
Spiritual Gleaning by C. H. Spurgeon
Spiritual Resurrection by C. H. Spurgeon
Substitution by C. H. Spurgeon
The Day of Atonement by C. H. Spurgeon
The Man Christ Jesus by C. H. Spurgeon
The Object of Christ's Death by C. H. Spurgeon
The Old, Old Story by C. H. Spurgeon
The Only Atoning Priest by C. H. Spurgeon
The Open Fountain by C. H. Spurgeon
The Unchangeable Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
All of Grace by C. H. Spurgeon
All Fullness in Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
The Approachableness of Jesus by C. H. Spurgeon
The Ascension of Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
A View of God's Glory by C. H. Spurgeon
Blood, The by C. H. Spurgeon
Lifting Up the Brazen Serpent by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ About His Father's Business by C. H. Spurgeon
Christian Conversion by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ is All by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ is All (2) by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ in the Covenant by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Crucified by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Exalted by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Lifted Up by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Our Passover by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ—The Power and Wisdom of God by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ's Prayer for His People by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ's Resurrection and Our Newness of Life by C. H. Spurgeon
Christ Our Substitute by C. H. Spurgeon
The Compassion of Christ, C. H. Spurgeon
Condescension of Christ, C. H. Spurgeon
Consolation in Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Death of Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Death and Life in Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Death of Jesus Christ for His People by C. H. Spurgeon
Doctrines of Grace Do Not Lead to Sin by C. H. Spurgeon
Election by C. H. Spurgeon
Essential Points In Prayer by C. H. Spurgeon
Faith by C. H. Spurgeon
Fruitless Vine by C. H. Spurgeon
Justification by Faith by C. H. Spurgeon
Man's Ruin and God's Remedy by C. H. Spurgeon
One Greater than the Temple by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Compassionate High Priest by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Expectation by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Glorious Transforming by C. H. Spurgeon
Our Lord's Prayer for His People's Sanctification by C. H. Spurgeon
Salvation Altogether by Grace by C. H. Spurgeon
Shed Blood of Jesus Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Sin and Grace by C. H. Spurgeon
Sin Laid on Jesus by C. H. Spurgeon
Sovereign Grace and Man's Responsibility by C. H. Spurgeon
Sovereignty and Salvation by C. H. Spurgeon
Spiritual Gleaning by C. H. Spurgeon
Spiritual Resurrection by C. H. Spurgeon
Substitution by C. H. Spurgeon
The Day of Atonement by C. H. Spurgeon
The Man Christ Jesus by C. H. Spurgeon
The Object of Christ's Death by C. H. Spurgeon
The Old, Old Story by C. H. Spurgeon
The Only Atoning Priest by C. H. Spurgeon
The Open Fountain by C. H. Spurgeon
The Unchangeable Christ by C. H. Spurgeon
Click to send us an email!
