FOR LOVE OF THE BIBLE The Battle for the Authorized Version and the Received Text from 1800 to Present By David W. Cloud

1995 by DWC Fifth Edition, illustrated, October 2008 ISBN 1-58318-004-4

DEDICATION To D. O. Fuller and D. A. Waite.

Contents [See below.] 4

Preface to the First Edition 5

INTRODUCTION [p. 8] "...there is a tremendous variety of opinion among those who defend the Textus Receptus (also called the TR, the Received Text, and the Traditional Text in this study) and the King James Bible." [9] (Joseph Philpot, "The Authorized Version 1611," True...?, ..., 1978, p. 21). Terence Brown, 1984 reprint, denies "that their work was perfect". Philip Mauro, "Which Version?" ("class of changes...in the meaning of English words") denies complete correctness for the A.V. three centuries later.

D.O. Fuller, Is The King James Version Nearest To The Original Autographs? n.d., p. 1). J.J. Ray said, "..." (God Wrote Only One Bible, p. 102). 10

DWC believes the KJB is without error.   "[T]he King James Bible is the inspired Word of God because it accurately translates the inspired, preserved text." 11

CHAPTER ONE Major Points of King James Bible Defense [p. 12] 1. We hold to the King James Bible because the modern critical text came from Egypt, a hotbed of theological heresy. [13] (F.H.A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to..., 1894, pp. 264, 265). [15] "John Burgon, who did extensive research into the history of the Bible, proved that the manuscripts favored by modern textual critics (e.g., the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) contain corruptions introduced by heretics in those early centuries." (Burgon, The Revision Revised, pp. 29, 30). Egypt in particular was a hotbed of heresy.... A Heretical School at Alexandria mixed pagan philosophy 15

Another heretic associated with Alexandria was Origen (185-254 A.D.) He "brazenly tampered" with the text of Scripture. [16-17] Pres.ian scholar Robert Dabney [17] Eusebius (270-340 A.D.) produced 50 Greek bibles for Constantine. [18b] Frederick Nolan, An Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, 1815, pp. 35, 326-332. [p. 19a] An Opposing School at Antioch [19b] ...to Syria where the great my. church was located at Antioch. Ignatius, his death in the early part of the second century. [20] My. Jack Moorman describes the battle between the correct text and the modern critical text. [21b] (Moorman, Modern Bible Versions: The Dark Secret). The "Antiochian text" has the best claim to purity.   Asia Minor was where the apostolic churches were located; it is where Greek was spoken natively. [22b] Mark 16:9-20; John 1:18; 1 Timothy 3:16, etc. in the KJV have been correctly preserved.   However, many of these were corrupted in the Sinaiticus (Aleph) & Vaticanus (B). [pp. 23b-24] 2. We hold to the King James Bible because we reject modern textual criticism. 24

Modern textual criticism was devised largely by men who treated the Bible as another book and who either did not believe in the doctrine of Bible preservation or refused to predicate their textual theories on this doctrine. Modern textual criticism claims that.... 25

The Greek text produced by modern textual criticism is much shorter than the Received Text New Testament. (Jack Moorman, Missing in Modern Bibles: Is the full Story Being Told, Bible for Today, 1981). Modern textual criticism was not popular until the... W & H Greek text in 1881. 26

Modern textual criticism favors A FEW GREEK UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS (e.g. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) and a small number of other manuscripts of similar character over the vast majority of the 5,471 Greek manuscripts and lectionaries extant. Writing in 1883, John Burgon observed, "...especially B [Vaticanus] and Aleph [Sinaiticus], have within the last twenty years established a tyrannical ascendancy over...the Critics, ...as a blind superstition" (The Revision Revised, p. 11). The Vaticanus (B) Greek manuscript 27

(Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. 75). The Sinaiticus (Aleph) codex was discovered by C. Tischendorf in 1844 & in 1859. [28b-30] F.H.A. Scrivener, who published A Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus in 1864 testified: (Burgon, p. 75). 29

(Burgon and Miller, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Vindicated, 1896, pp. 32, 33). (Herman Hoskier, Codex B and Its Allies, Vol. II, p. 1.) 30

Modern textual criticism's goal is unscriptural. Modern textual crticism's theories are strange and unscriptural. 31

(Burgon, The Revision Revised, pp. 278-287). It is evident that Burgon turned Hort's Syrian 'recension' theory on its head and.... 33

3. We hold to the King James Bible because the modern texts and versions are a product of end-time apostasy. The following info from The Modern Bible Version Hall of Shame, @ Way of Life Literature. 38

George Samson, president of Columbian College, (The English Revisers' Greek Text, 1882, p. 97). [p. 39a] The Trinitarian Bible Society issued the following wise warning: "..." (If the Foundations Be Destroyed, T.B.S. Article No. 14, p. 13). [p. 39b] Edward F. Hills, who had a doctorate...from Harvard University, said: "...." (The King James Bible Defended, pp. 1, 44). [39c-40a] Johann Jakob Griesbach & German Rationalism [CHM note: He appeared to be a lost Lutheran.] [pp. 40b-41a] George Vance Smith, British committee that produced the English Revised Version n. t. (1870-81).   He was a Unitarian minister. 41

B. F. Westcott (1825-1901) and F. J. A. Hort (1828- 1892), both ERV [42a-44a] Dr. Donald Waite's books (The Theological Heresies of W & H:) @ Bible for Today. 42

Ezra Abbot, ASV (1901), Harvard Unitarian [44b-45a] Joseph H. Thayer, ASV, Unitarian Eberhard Nestle (1851-1913) was editor of a Greek n.t. critical text. United Bible Societies Greek n.t. 45

Carlo M. Martini, Jesuit, New Ager Kurt & Barbara Aland, UBS Bruce Metzger, liberal RSV 46

Conclusion The Psalmist displayed a truly spiritual attitude toward God's Word: "..." (Psalm 119:89, 127, 128). 47

CHAPTER TWO FROM 1800 TO 1870 The Battle against the Pre- Westcott-Hort Critical Texts 48

Annals of the English Bible by Christopher Anderson (1845) [49] H.S. Miller, Gen. Biblical Introduction, pp. 365,66. [54] (Herman C. Hoskier, Codex B and Its Allies: a Study and an Indictment, p. viii). [54]

Textual critics seek to overthrow the Greek Received Text [55] Simon, Bengel, Semler, Griesbach, Lachmann, Alford, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott, and Hort. John J. Wetstein, Christian F. Matthaei, Andrew Birch, J.M.A. Scholz, and F.H.A. Scrivener (1813-91) largely supported the Received Text rather than the critical text. [55b-56a] George Salmon (1812-1904), John Burgon (1813-1888), Edward Miller (1825-1901), and Herman Hoskier (1864-1938).   All of these ... they repudiated the critical text. What Griesbach attempted [1774-1805], was denounced [1782-1805] by C. F. Matthæi;--disapproved by Scholz;--demonstrated to be untenable by Abp. Laurence. (Burgon, The Revision Revised, pp. 380, 81). (Dr. Alfred Martin, A Critical Examination of the Westcott-Hort Textual Theory, p. 35). 56

CHM note: English Critical Text History. Darby's translation was criticized in the November and December 1872 issue of Spurgeon's Sword and Trowel, .... 57-58

Men Who Stood Against the Early Critical Greek Texts Martin Scholz of Germany [only for a time]. [59b] Richard Lawrence, bishop in the Chu. of England, also took a stand (1814) against Griesbach. Frederick Nolan (1784-1864) ...into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate or Received Text of the New Testament, ... was published in 1815 [60] Henry John Todd (1763-1845) in 1819 [62b] J.W. Whittaker of Cambridge, in 1820 [64] The Quarterly Review, 1818 [66] The Quarterly Review, July 1820 [69] "[I]t was in The Quarterly Review, in 1881 and 1882, that John Burgon's powerful critique of the Revised Version first appeared." 69

Richard Laurence (1763-1838), Oxford, in 1820 [70a] Henry Walter (1785-1859), a Hebrew scholar of note, in 1823 John Jebb, Bishop [70b-71] Noah Webster (1758-1843), the American lexicopher [CHM note: We consider his 1833 translation only a private one.] 72

William T. Brantley, D.D. (1816-1882), and Octavius Winslow, D.D. (d. 1878), published in 1837 Objections to a Baptist Version of the New Testament with.... [73a] Alexander McCaul, D.D. (1799-1863) published his KJB defense in 1857 under the title Reasons for Holding Fast. [73b] Lord Panmure, speaking before the Edinburgh Bible Society in January 1857 [74b-75a] James Lister, minister of Liverpool, England, defended the KJB in 1820 in The Excellence of the Authorized Version... [75b] Solomon Caesar Malan, D.D. (1812-1894), Vicar, published A Vindication of the Authorized Version, from Charges Brought against It by Recent Writers (1856), A Plea for the Received Text and for the Authorized Version of the New Testament (1869), and Title (1881). [CHM note: S. C. Malan was a friend of Burgon.] 78

Alexander W. McClure, D.D. (1808-1865), wrote a series of biographies of the King James Bible translators called The Translators Revived.   It was published in 1855 in New York by a board of the Reformed Prot. Dutch Church. [82b] (The Translators Revived, pp. 11, 59, 61, 63-66, 235- 239). D.H. Conrad delivered a message in April 1856, in Richmond, Virginia [p. 85] John Cumming, a letter in the London Times, August 26, 1856, gave warning: [p. 86a] Anthony Cooper (1801-85), the Christian statesman, better known as the Seventh Earl of Shaftesbury. Speaking before the British & Foreign Bible Society, May 1856, opposed the revision of the KJB: [p. 86b] Joseph Philpot (1802-1869), Fellow, Oxford, minister of the Gospel, and editor of The Gospel Standard 1840-1869, testimony which appeared in April 1857: Philpot gave six reasons for rejecting a revision of the King James Bible, and his warnings of what would occur if such a revision were.... [p. 88b-89] George Perkins Marsh (1801-1882) between 1860 and 1870 spoke out in defense of the KJB. [pp. 90b-91a] Thomas Rawson Birks, Professor, Cambridge, in 1878, took a stand. [p. 91b] Robert Lewis Dabney, Presbyterian pastor, S. Pres. Review, April 1871; reprinted in 1890 [pp. 91c-94a] Robert Jefferson Breckinridge (1800-1871) and James Thornwell (1812-1862).   Old School Presbyterians in America.   In 1834, RJB wrote.... [pp. 95b-97a] In 1856, the Am. Bib. Soc. produced a revision of the King James Bible that claimed to be a mere update of language but actually proceeded along critical lines.   .... (Sightler, p. 45). [p. 96] Arthur Cleveland Coxe, Episcopalian bishop of western New York.   In 1857.... [pp. 97b-102a] Coxe warned that the American Bible Society had become infiltrated with theological modernism and that it had turned away from its charter by publishing (in 1852) a revised edition of the King James Bible. [p. 99] John Dowling, Baptist pastor in Rhode Island & New York (NYC). [pp. 102b-104a] In 1843 he published a defense of the KJV in The Burning of the Bibles, Defence of the Protestant Version of the Scriptures Against the Attacks of Popish Apologists for the Champlain Bible Burners. In 1850, John Dowling published The Old-Fashioned Bible, or Ten Reasons Against the Proposed Baptist Version of the New Testament. Dowling used the strongest terminology to describe his concern over the new version of the English Bible that had been published by the American and Foreign Bible Society. 103

Conclusion 104 105

[ Christian Home Bible Course ]