Bi 401 Study Guide

School of Religion
Bi 401
Bible Doctrines
Online Course
Study Guide

OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 3

BIBLIOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF SCRIPTURE ............................................................................. 7
Questions for Appendix A (Panosian) .............................................................................. 14
Questions for Appendix B (Wisdom) ................................................................................ 16
Questions for A Pictorial History of our English Bible ........................................................ 17

THEOLOGY PROPER: THE DOCTRINE OF GOD......................................................................... 21

CHRISTOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST ............................................................................. 27

PNEUMATOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT........................................................ 31

ANGELOLOGY: THE DOCTRINE OF ANGELS............................................................................. 38

APPENDIX A: WHAT IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD?...................................................... 45

APPENDIX B: LIGHT ON THE BIBLE TEXT DEBATE ................................................................... 51

1
OVERVIEW

PRIMARY TEXT

Ryrie, Charles C.. Basic Theology: A Popular and Systematic Guide to Understanding
Biblical Truth. 1986; reprint, Chicago: Moody, 1999.

SUPPLEMENTAL TEXTS

Beale, David. A Pictorial History of Our English Bible. Greenville, S.C.: BJUP, 1982.

Panosian, Edward. What is the Inspired Word of God? Greenville, S.C.: BJUP,
1979.

Wisdom, Thurman. Light on the Bible Text Debate. Greenville, S.C.: BJUP, 1984.

SYLLABUS

This syllabus is designed to maximize your learning through the reading assignments.
Although the study questions identify the primary textbook items that you will be held
responsible for on quizzes and tests, questions for the quizzes and test may be drawn
from material outside the questions on this study guide.

3

BASIC THEOLOGY BY CHARLES C. RYRIE
INTRODUCTION

All items: daily quiz & unit test
Items with an asterisk (*): review material for final exam

WHO SHOULD READ THEOLOGY?

1. Is everyone a theologian (9)?*

2. What is the simple definition of theology (9)?

3. What is supposed to be the result of healthy doctrine (10)?

CHAPTER 1: CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS

1. What is the meaning of the words theos and logos that make up the word theology
(13)?

2. What 3 elements are included in the general concept of theology (13)?

3. What is Ryries formal definition of theology (13, 15)?*

4. What is the focus of historical theology (14)?*

5. What is Ryries technical definition of biblical theology (14)?*

6. What does systematic theology do (15)?*

CHAPTER 2: SOME PRESUPPOSITIONS

1. What is the watershed or basic presupposition of Christian theology (16)?*

2. What must come before theological systematization (16)?

4
3. What are Ryries 3 interpretive presuppositions (16-17)?*

4. What is the difference between the OT and NT as sources for theology (17)?

5. What guidelines does Ryrie give for the proper use of proof texts (17)?*

6. What is the best answer when dealing with questions that Scripture does not
answer (18)?*

7. What are Ryries 4 personal presuppositions (18-19)?

8. Does exegesis provide all the answers for the questions of theology? Explain (19).

9. What is worship (19)?

CHAPTER 3: THE QUESTION OF AUTHORITY

1. What is the hallmark of liberalism, and what are the 3 vehicles of divine
communication in liberalism (20)?*

2. What did Schleiermacher develop (20)?

3. With what theological authority is Immanuel Kant associated (21)?

4. What is the relationship between neo-orthodoxy, liberalism, and conservatism
(21)?

5. How did Karl Barth define the Word (21)?

6. What kind of authority does the Bible have in neo-orthodoxy? Explain (21).*

7. Where does authority ultimately rest in Roman Catholicism (22)?*

5
8. To what does conservative Protestantism or orthodoxy limit the ground of
religious authority (22)?*

9. In what 3 ways do conservatives practically deny the Bible as their sole basis of
authority (22)?
7

BIBLIOLOGY


CHAPTER 9: SPECIAL REVELATION

1. How does general revelation differ from special revelation (71)?*

2. What are the 10 avenues of special revelation, and which is most inclusive
(71-73)?

3. According to Ryrie, why does a preacher or teacher today not qualify as a
prophet (72)?

4. What are 4 characteristics of the revelation in the Bible (73)?

5. What 2 approaches exist as to the credibility of the scriptural revelation (73)?

6. What 2 contemporary views of revelation does Ryrie reject as subjective,
unstable, and sub-Christian (73-74)?

CHAPTER 10: THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION

1. What is the significance of 1 Timothy 5:18 for the doctrine of inspiration (77)?*

2. What is the significance of 2 Peter 3:16 for the doctrine of inspiration (77)?*

3. What is the meaning of the word translated inspired in 2 Timothy 3:16, and how
does Ryrie sum up the claims of this verse (78)?*

4. What is the significance of 2 Peter 1:21 for the doctrine of inspiration (79)?*

5. How does Ryrie sum up the claims of 1 Corinthians 2:13 (80)?*
8
6. What book of the Bible is an example of the use of researched material in
connection with inspiration (80)?

7. What is Ryries full definition of inspiration (81)?*

CHAPTER 11: DEFECTIONS FROM THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION

1. What is natural inspiration (83)?

2. What is dynamic or mystical inspiration (83)?

3. What is degree inspiration (84)?

4. What is the contemporary expression of partial inspiration, and what is the
problem with this view (84)?

5. What is concept inspiration, and what is the obvious fallacy in this view (85)?*

6. What is Barthian inspiration, and what is the problem with this view (85-86)?*

CHAPTER 12: THE INERRANCY OF THE BIBLE

1. Can one be a biblicist and deny inerrancy (87)?

2. What is the result if one allows for errors in the Bible?* Illustrate (87-88).*

3. How does Ryrie respond to those who argue that one should not teach inerrancy
because the Bible does not clearly teach it (89-90)?*

4. How does Ryrie respond to those who argue that inerrancy is a nonessential
doctrine because it applies only to the unavailable originals of Scripture (90)?*

5. How does Ryrie respond to those who argue that inerrancy is a recent teaching
and thus should not be a matter of concern (91-92)?*
9
6. How does Ryrie define inerrancy, and what literary features does this definition
allow for (93)?*

7. What other doctrine parallels the divine-human nature of Scripture and
demonstrates that human involvement does not inevitably involve sin (94)?

8. Note Ryries statement about overemphasizing either the divine side or the
human side of inspiration (95).

CHAPTER 13: INERRANCY AND THE TEACHINGS OF CHRIST

1. What is the deductive evidence for inerrancy (97)?*

2. What 2 points does Ryrie make about Jesus view of the Bible from the account of
His temptation (97-98)?

3. What do Christs references to Adam and Eve, Noah, and Jonah demonstrate
(98-99)?

4. Explain the Lords promise in Matthew 5:17-18 (99-101).*

5. Explain Christs 3 claims regarding the Bible in John 10:31-38 (101-2).*

6. On what grammatical feature in Exodus 3 did Jesus base His argument for the
resurrection in Matthew 22:23-33 (104)?

7. On what grammatical feature in Psalm 110 did Jesus base His argument for the
Messiahs divine-human nature in Matthew 22:41-46 (105-6)?

CHAPTER 14: PROBLEM PASSAGES

1. What is the inerrantists basic outlook on problems in the Bible (107)?*

2. What 2 arguments does Ryrie advance against the idea that Genesis 1 and 2
contain conflicting accounts of Creation (108-9)?
10
3. Explain Ryries answer to the question about Cains wife (109-10).

4. Explain Ryries answer to the question of who caused David to number Israel
(110-11).

5. Note Ryries statement about scribal errors and the point that inerrancy cannot
be extended to copies of Scripture (111).*

6. How does Ryrie explain Jesus statement about the mustard seed, and why is this
particular issue so important doctrinally (113-14)?

CHAPTER 15: THE CANON

1. What is the derivation of the word canon, and what is its twofold meaning (119)?*

2. What is meant by self-authentication (119)?*

3. Since what year has the Christian church considered the canon to be complete,
and what is the implication of the churchs decision (120)?*

4. Note the claims of divine authority in the Law and the Prophets as indicative of
canonicity (120-21).*

5. What does Malachi 4:5 indicate about the OT canon (121)?*

6. Note Ryries summary statement about the Dead Sea Scrolls (121).

7. What did Josephus say about the OT canon (121)?

8. What 3 NT factors does Ryrie cite as evidence for the OT canon (122)?

9. What are the 3 tests for canonicity (122)?

11
10. What is the significance of the following verses for NT canonicity (123)?
Colossians 4:16 and 1 Thessalonians 4:15:

1 Timothy 5:18:

2 Peter 3:16:

11. What church council (place/date) fixed the limits of the NT canon as including
all 27 books as we have them today (124)?

CHAPTER 16: THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE

1. Define hermeneutics and exegesis (125).*

2. Does every interpreter of the Bible have a system of hermeneutics (125)?

3. What are the 4 hermeneutical systems (125-28)?*

4. What 2 labels are more precise than literal (126)?*

5. Become familiar with Ryries response to semiallegorical interpretation (126-28).

6. In what one area of Bible doctrine do many evangelicals fail to interpret literally,
and to what position does this lead (128)?*

7. What 3 points does Ryrie give as rationale for literal hermeneutics (128)?

8. What are Ryries 4 principles of normal hermeneutics (129-30).*

9. What is sensus plenior (129)?

10. What is the most common definition of illumination, and what 2 passages
(book/chapter) does Ryrie cite as the principal passages on this doctrine (132)?
13

APPENDIX A: WHAT IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD?
BY EDWARD M. PANOSIAN


1. Why did God not allow the autographs of Scripture (no golden plates let down
from heaven) to continue in existence?

2. Why can we say with certainty that we have every word of the Word of God
even though differences exist among the manuscripts?*

3. On what text was the first printed edition of the Greek NT based, and who
produced this NT?* What was his ecclesiastical affiliation? How old were the
manuscripts he used?* What is the source of his last 6 verses of Revelation?

4. What does Textus Receptus mean?

5. What was Erasmuss view of Christianity? What was his attitude toward the
Reformation?

6. What factors make the KJV without peer among English translations?

7. To what extent can a version be described as inspired?*

8. What 2 men edited the second major text of the Greek NT in the nineteenth
century?* What was their ecclesiastical affiliation? What newly available
manuscripts did they use, what is the importance of these manuscripts, how old
are they, and what was the point of using them?*

9. What is Panosians response to the charge that Westcott and Hort held to
unorthodox doctrine?

10. Who are the 2 greatest American Greek scholars who were strongly conservative
and yet defended the Westcott-Hort text?

14
11. What is the amount and nature of the substantial variations among the various
NT manuscripts?*

12. In evaluating Bible translations, what factor should be considered in addition to
the recovery of old manuscripts? In this regard, to what extent is the KJV today
the same as it was in 1611?

13. In what area does Panosian give a very careful and necessary warning?* In this
regard, which modern translations does he reject, and which does he endorse?

14. What simple questions of logic are raised by designating a particular version of
the Bible as specially inspired?

15. What truth about Gods Word deserves more emphasis than matters of
manuscripts and translations?

15
APPENDIX B: LIGHT ON THE BIBLE TEXT DEBATE
BY THURMAN WISDOM


1. What is textual criticism?*

2. What are the 3 sub-groups within the KJV-only position?*

3. Who has stated that the KJV is superior to the originals, and what dogma is
demanded by this position?

4. What are the very serious problems with the Received Text position?

5. What is the most reasonable and viable of the KJV positions?

6. What is the key issue between Majority Text and Westcott-Hort proponents?*
Summarize the 2 general positions on this issue.*

7. Over what percent of the verses of the NT does the whole textual controversy
revolve?*

8. How does Wisdom respond to the argument that the Textus Receptus is a
providentially approved text?

9. How does Wisdom respond to the argument that the Westcott-Hort text
undermines biblical doctrines?

10. Why do some modern translations undermine biblical doctrines?

11. Why does Matthew 5:18 not support any textual position?

16
12. How should the average Christian handle the question of textual variations?

13. In what does true orthodoxy consist?

17
A PICTORIAL HISTORY OF OUR ENGLISH BIBLE
BY DAVID BEALE


1. What phrase describes Gods inspiring of all Scripture equally (1)?*

2. What does the term testament designate in Scripture (2)?

3. What are the 3 divisions of the Jewish (Hebrew) OT (2)?*

4. Within about how many years after Jesus resurrection was all the NT written
(3)?

5. What church council (place/date) officially recognized our NT books as
canonical (4)?*

6. How old are the earliest available lists of NT books nearly identical to ours (4)?

7. What are the 4 basic principles of canonicity employed by the early church (4)?*

8. What title was given to John Wyclif because of the work he did (8)?

9. From which ancient version did John Wyclif translate (9)?

10. What was the first English Bible (name/year) (6, 10)?*

11. What was the first major book in the west (name/year) to be printed from
movable type (12)?

12. What most important preparation for the Reformation was completed by 1500
(14)?
18
13. What Bible (name/year) became the standard for all future English Bibles (19),*
and how much of the King James translation was drawn from this Bible (20)?

14. What was the first complete English Bible (name/year) ever printed (21)?*

15. Whose translations were behind the Matthew Bible (1537), and why was it so
named (25)?

16. What was the first Bible (name/year) to be specifically authorized for public use
in English churches, and why was it so named (26-27)?

17. What was the first English Bible (name/year) to be translated entirely from the
original languages, the first to have numbered verses, and the one to be carried
by the Pilgrims on the Mayflower (30-31, 33)?*

18. Who had first introduced NT verse divisions, and when (31)?

19. What unpopular version (name/year) was translated to compete with the
Geneva Bible (36)?

20. Why did King James I reject the Geneva Bible (39)?*

21. How many translators actually engaged in producing the KJV? Into how many
groups were they divided, and where did they work (39)?

22. How many complete or partial editions of the KJV were produced between 1611
and 1800 (43)?

23. What were the 3 most ancient and significant Greek manuscripts not available to
the King James translators (45)?*

24. Which of the 182 editions of the KJV produced between 1611 and 1644 was the
most significant, and why (46-47)?

25. What does the Latin word codex mean (48)?*
19
26. What were uncials (48)?*

27. What are the proper name, dates of origin, and present location of Codex A
(48, 50)?

28. What are the proper name, dates of origin, and present location of Codex B (50)?

29. What are the proper name, dates of origin, and present location of Codex Aleph
(52)? Who discovered it, and where (52-53)? What is its present location (56)?

30. Who edited the London Polyglot, and how many languages did it include (57)?

31. What does the term Massorah mean, and to what does it refer (58-59)?

32. During what centuries were the Masoretes particularly active? What is their
great contribution (59)?*

33. What does Peshitta mean, and to what does it refer? During what century was the
Peshitta NT used (61)?

34. What circumstances provided Luther the opportunity to translate the Bible into
German, and when did he begin translating the NT (63)?

35. What passage was Erasmus pressured to insert from the Vulgate into the third
edition of his Greek NT (65)?

36. What did Luthers Bible do for the German language (65), and why did a
contemporary call Luther the German Cicero (66)?

37. Note all the glossary terms (67-68).
21
THEOLOGY PROPER


CHAPTER 4: THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD

1. What 2 facts does the Bible teach regarding the possibility of knowing God (27)?

2. What are the 2 orientations of a full knowledge of God (28)?

3. What are the 4 purposes of the knowledge of God (28-29)?

4. What are the 4 prerequisites to the knowledge of God (29-30)?

5. In contrast to other scholarly endeavors, what must be our attitude in studying
God (29)?

CHAPTER 5: THE REVELATION OF GOD

1. What is the difference between general revelation and special revelation (31)?*

2. In what 3 ways is general revelation general (31)?

3. What is the cosmological argument for the existence of God (31-32)?*

4. What 2 key passages (book/chapter) show creation to be a channel of revelation
(33)?*

5. What is the teleological argument for the existence of God (34)?*

6. What is the anthropological argument for the existence of God (35)?*
22
7. In what chapter of Acts does Paul argue in a manner similar to the
anthropological argument (36)?

8. What is the ontological argument for the existence of God (36)?*

9. Do the traditional arguments for the existence of God prove the existence of the
God of the Bible?* What is the value of these arguments (37)?*

10. How is God just in condemning man (37-38)?

CHAPTER 6: THE PERFECTIONS OF GOD

1. What are attributes?* What is the significance of calling Gods attributes His
perfections? Note that Gods perfections are not component parts and that He
is not the sum total of His perfections (39).

2. Identify and define the 3 traditional classifications of Gods attributes (40).

3. Define the 14 perfections of God discussed by Ryrie (41-50).*
Eternity:

Freedom:

Holiness:

Immutability:

Infinity:

Love:

Omnipotence:

Omnipresence:

Omniscience:

Righteousness:

Simplicity:
23
Sovereignty:

Truth:

Unity:

4. What application does Ryrie make from the freedom of God (42)?

5. What is the attribute by which God wanted to be especially known in OT times
(42)?*

6. If God is immutable, how can it be said that He repents (43)?

7. How does Ryrie argue against universalism (45)?

8. In what 2 areas is Gods omnipotence limited (45)?

9. What is Ryries approach to the problem of divine sovereignty and human
responsibility (49)?*

CHAPTER 7: THE NAMES OF GOD

1. What is the function of Gods many names (51)?*

2. What is the proper interpretation of the plural form of Elohim (52)?

3. What 4 acts are closely related to Elohim (52)?*

4. By what title did God appear to the patriarchs to give comfort and confirmation
of the Abrahamic Covenant (52)?*

5. What does El Elyon mean and emphasize (53)?

6. What does El Olam mean and emphasize (53)?

24
7. What is Gods personal name,* and to whom was the deep significance of this
name revealed (53)?

8. According to Ryrie, what is the principal idea of I AM WHO I AM (53)?*

9. What is the origin of the word Jehovah (54)?

10. According to Ryrie, what 3 facets are included in Yahweh (54)?*

11. What is the significance of Yahweh Sabaoth (54)?*

12. What does the divine title Adonai convey, and what is its NT equivalent (55)?*

13. What is the NT equivalent to Elohim (55)?*

14. What verse seems to be the clearest designation of Christ as God (56)?*

CHAPTER 8: THE TRIUNITY OF GOD

1. In what sense is the Trinity a biblical teaching (58)?*

2. What are the 5 intimations of the Trinity in the OT (58-59)?

3. What are the 2 paths of evidence for the Trinity in the NT (60)?*

4. How does Ryrie respond to the Jehovahs Witnesses translation of John 1:1 (60)?

5. What 3 passages does Ryrie cite for the Triunity of God?* Which provides the
strongest support, and why (61)?*

6. What is the significance of John 10:30 for the doctrine of the Trinity (61)?

25
7. What is meant by the ontological Trinity, and what are Ryries 3 points in
explaining this expression (61-62)?*

8. What is the purpose of the expression eternal generation, and what is Ryries
evaluation of this concept (62)?

9. What is meant by the procession of the Spirit, and what verse teaches this
concept (62)?

10. What is meant by the economical Trinity, and what is the role of each Person of
the Godhead in this regard (62)?*

11. In the final analysis, what is the nature of the doctrine of the Trinity (62-63)?*

12. What did Dynamic Monarchianism teach regarding the Trinity (64)?

13. What did Modalistic Monarchianism teach regarding the Trinity (64)?

14. What did Arius teach regarding the Trinity, and who was his opponent (64)?*

15. What term was chosen at Nicea to describe the relationship between the Father
and the Son, and what does this term mean (65)?*

16. What 3 Cappadocian theologians gave definitive shape to the doctrine of the
Trinity in the second half of the fourth century (65)?

17. What question was settled at the Council of Constantinople (66)?

18. Who wrote the Western churchs final formulation of Trinitarian doctrine (66)?*

19. What did the Synod of Toledo add to the Constantinople Creed (66)?

20. What 5 examples does Ryrie give to illustrate the ramifications of the doctrine of
the Trinity (67-68)?
27
CHRISTOLOGY


CHAPTER 40: THE PREINCARNATE CHRIST

1. Distinguish between Christs preexistence and eternality (273-74).

2. What modern-day group has an Arian-like Christology that denies the eternality
of the Logos (274)?*

3. What does the term charakter in Hebrews 1:3 mean (275)?

4. In what passage (book/chapter) does Christ explicitly claim eternality (275)?*

5. What are the 2 activities of the preincarnate Christ (275)?*

6. How do we know that the Angel of Yahweh was a preincarnate appearance of
Christ (275-76)?

CHAPTER 41: THE INCARNATION OF CHRIST

1. What does John 1 mean when it speaks of the Word becoming flesh (277)?*

2. What does the term Immanuel in Isaiah 7:14 mean (277)?*

3. What is the meaning of the Hebrew word almah in Isaiah 7:14,* and what are the
3 interpretations of the individual referred to in this passage (278)?

4. What was the purpose of the Virgin Birth (279)?*

5. What is the common distinction between the genealogies of Matthew and Luke
(279)?
28
6. What are the 7 purposes of the incarnation (281-82)?

7. What is the significance of the title Son of Man (282, 287)?*

CHAPTER 42: THE PERSON OF CHRIST INCARNATE

1. What church council (with date) produced the definitive statement on the person
of Christ, and what is Ryries concise description of this statement (284)?*

2. What are 4 arguments for the deity of Christ (284-86)?*

3. What is the significance of the title Son of God (285)?*

4. What are 4 arguments for the humanity of Christ (286-87)?*

5. What does the expression hypostatic union mean (287)?*

6. How should the word nature be understood with reference to Christ (287-88)?

7. Define the following Christological heresies (289-90).
Docetism:

Arianism:

Apollinarianism:

Nestorianism:

CHAPTER 43: CHRIST: PROPHET, PRIEST, AND KING

1. What passage (book/chapter) predicts the coming of a prophet like Moses (292)?

2. What are the 4 major messages of Christ recorded in the Gospels (293)?

3. In what 2 ways was Christs prophetic ministry authenticated, and what was the
test case of this ministry (296)?
29
4. What are the 4 features of Melchizedekan priesthood (297)?

CHAPTER 44: THE SELF-EMPTYING OF CHRIST

1. What is the central passage (book/chapter) on the kenosis (299)?*

2. What does the term morphe in Philippians 2:6 mean (300)?

3. What is Ryries definition of the kenosis (301)?*

4. What are 2 false meanings of the kenosis (301-2)?

CHAPTER 45: THE SINLESSNESS OF CHRIST

1. Cite the statement that asserts the sinlessness of Christ in each of the following
verses (303-4).
Luke 1:35

2 Corinthians 5:21*

1 Peter 2:22

1 John 3:5

Hebrews 4:15*

2. Summarize Hodges argument for Christs peccability (304).*

3. Summarize Shedds argument for Christs impeccability (304-6).*

4. What are 4 results of Christs testings (306)?

CHAPTER 46: THE RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION OF CHRIST

1. Summarize the 4-fold importance of Christs Resurrection (308).
To His person:

To His work:
30
To the Gospel:

To us:

2. What are the 2 categories of evidence for Christs Resurrection (309-10).*

3. What passage (book/chapter) provides the most detailed description of Christ
risen and ascended (310)?*

4. What is the significance of the expression firstborn from the dead (310)?*

5. What passage (book/chapter) provides the principal description of the event of
Christs Ascension (311)?

6. What was the significance of the Ascension for the work of Christ (312)?

CHAPTER 47: THE POST-ASCENSION MINISTRIES OF CHRIST

1. What important event depended on Christs going to the Father (313)?*

2. What are 3 present ministries of Christ (314)?*

3. What does Ephesians 4:9 mean by Christs descent into the lower parts of the
earth (314)?

4. What are 3 future ministries of Christ (315-6)?*
31
PNEUMATOLOGY

All items: daily quiz & final exam

CHAPTER 59: WHO IS THE HOLY SPIRIT?

1. How is the Spirit often depicted when His personality is denied (395)?

2. What 3 attributes of personality does the Spirit possess (395)?

3. What fact demonstrates that the Spirit has feelings (395)?

4. What 4 actions of a person does the Spirit exhibit (396)?

5. What significant grammatical consideration in John 16:13-14 supports the
personality of the Spirit (396-97)?

6. What is the meaning of another in John 14:16 (397)?

7. What 3 exclusively divine attributes does the Bible ascribe to the Spirit (397)?

8. What 3 exclusively divine actions does the Bible attribute to the Spirit (397)?

9. In what way does the NT identify the Spirit as Yahweh (398)?

10. How does Matthew 28:19 argue for the deity of the Spirit (398)?

CHAPTER 60: THE HOLY SPIRIT IN OLD TESTAMENT TIMES

1. What are the 5 activities of creation in which the Spirit was clearly involved
(399-400)?

2. What verse provides the most inclusive statement regarding the Spirit as the
Agent of revelation and inspiration (400)?
32
3. According to Godet, in what sense does the whole meaning of the statement
dwelleth with you, and shall be in you (Jn. 14:17) consist (401)?

4. What are Ryries 3 points regarding the nature of the Spirits ministry to people
in the OT (401-2)?

5. In what way did the Spirit minister to the entire nation of Israel in the OT (402)?

6. What 6 ministries of the Spirit are not definitively recorded in the OT (402)?

CHAPTER 61: THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE LIFE OF OUR LORD

1. What are the 4 aspects of the ministry of the Spirit in the life of Christ (404)?

2. To what office of Christ was the Spirits ministry related (404)?

3. What miracle is especially related to Jesus Messianic claims and the empowering
of the Spirit (also the most frequently recorded miracle) (404-5)?

4. What chapter of Matthew records the conflict Jesus had with the Pharisees over
the Spirit (405-6)?

5. What was the only logical conclusion to be reached by Jesus exorcisms (406)?

6. According to Ryrie, why was it unforgivable to misunderstand the power of the
Spirit (406)?

7. According to Ryrie, can the unpardonable sin be committed today? Why or why
not (407)?

CHAPTER 62: THE SPIRIT INDWELLING

1. What are Ryries 3 points regarding the people indwelt by the Spirit (409)?

33
2. In what verse does Paul declare that not to have the Spirit is the same as not
belonging to Christ (409)?

3. What doctrine is inseparable from the permanent indwelling of the Spirit (410)?

4. How does Ryrie respond to the objection that the Bible contains illustrations of
temporary indwelling (411)?

5. How does Ryrie explain the delay in the giving of the Spirit to the Samaritans in
Acts 8 (411-12)?

6. How does Ryrie explain the indwelling of John the Baptists disciples at Ephesus
in Acts 19 (412)?

7. What event established the normal Gentile pattern for receiving the Spirit (412)?

8. How does Ryrie define the NT anointing by the Spirit (412)?

9. What are Ryries 3 points of application regarding the indwelling of the Spirit
(413)?

CHAPTER 63: THE SPIRIT SEALING

1. What 3 passages (book/chapter) speak of the Spirits sealing (414)?

2. When does sealing take place, and how do we know this (414)?

3. What is the duration of sealing, and what does this guarantee (415)?

4. What 4 ideas are included in the concept of sealing (415)?

CHAPTER 64: THE SPIRIT BAPTIZING

1. Who first predicted the baptism of the Spirit (417)?
34
2. What is the distinctive purpose of the Spirits baptism, and what does this imply
about when it began (417)? When did Jesus say it would happen for the first time
(418)?

3. What 4 reasons does Ryrie list for the confusion regarding the Spirits baptizing
(417)?

4. What is the central text on the Spirits baptism, and what does it clearly state
(418)?

5. What 2 consequences result from the Spirits baptism (419)?

6. What is the Neo-pentecostal approach to the Spirits baptism, and how does
Ryrie respond to this view (419-21; note chart on 422)?

CHAPTER 65: THE SPIRIT GIFTING

1. What are the 3 key chapters in the Pauline Epistles that discuss spiritual gifts
(423)?

2. What does the word charisma mean (423)?

3. After discussing what a spiritual gift is not, how does Ryrie define the expression
positively (424)?

4. What passage (book/chapter) makes it clear that all believers have at least one
spiritual gift (425)?

5. What are Ryries 5 steps for discovering and developing ones spiritual gifts
(426-29)?

6. Why should the believer not limit his service to the area of his spiritual gift (428)?

7. Define the following spiritual gifts (429-32).
Apostleship:
35
Prophecy:

Miracles & healings:

Tongues:

Interpretation of tongues:

Evangelism:

Pastor:

Serving:

Teaching:

Faith:

Exhortation:

Distinguishing spirits:

Showing mercy:

Giving:

Administration:

Wisdom & knowledge:

8. What were the 2 purposes of interpreted tongues (430)?

CHAPTER 66: THE SPIRIT FILLING

1. How does Ryrie define spirituality from 1 Corinthians 2:15 (433)?

2. What is the key to producing spirituality in the believer (433)?

3. What are the 2 facets of Spirit filling (434)?

4. What are the 3 characteristics of Spirit filling in the second sense (435-36)?
36
5. According to Ryrie, what is not and what is the way to be filled with the Spirit
(437)?

CHAPTER 67: OTHER MINISTRIES OF THE SPIRIT

1. What is the content of all the truth that the Spirit teaches believers (439)?

2. What is the result that indicates whether the Spirit has been teaching (439-40)?

3. What does the anointing in 1 John 2 mean (440)?

4. What 3 ministries of the Spirit are discussed in Romans 8 (440-41)?

5. What are the 3 aspects of sanctification (442)?

6. Who is the prominent Agent in progressive sanctification (443)?

CHAPTER 68: HISTORY OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE SPIRIT

1. What view of the Montanists was rejected by the church (445)?

2. What Trinitarian issue was settled at each of the following councils (448)?
Nicaea:

Constantinople:

Toledo:

3. What 2 aspects of the Spirits work did the Reformers especially emphasize
(449)?

4. What group essentially replaced the Spirits work in regeneration with the
human will (450)?

5. What Puritan wrote an important work on the Spirit (450)?
37
6. What aspect of the Spirits work did the Plymouth Brethren develop (451)?

7. How do most neo-orthodox writers view the Spirit (451)?

8. How does the Pentecostalism view the baptism and gifts of the Spirit (452)?

38
ANGELOLOGY

All items: daily quiz & final exam

CHAPTER 17: THE EXISTENCE OF ANGELS

1. What are 3 characteristics of the biblical revelation regarding angels (138)?

2. What is the meaning of both the Hebrew and Greek words for angels (138)?

3. How does the OT always present angels (138)?

4. Which book of the Bible contains more references to angels than any other (139)?

5. What are some indications that Jesus believed in the reality of angels (139)?

CHAPTER 18: THE CREATION OF ANGELS

1. What biblical fact indicates the general time when the angels were created (141)?

2. What 2 points does Ryrie make regarding the state of the angels at their creation
(141)?

CHAPTER 19: THE NATURE OF ANGELS

1. What are Ryries 5 points regarding the nature of angels (143-45)?

2. Why do angels qualify as personalities (143)?

3. Why do angels evidently have greater knowledge than humans (143)?

4. What does Ryrie mean when he describes angels as finite spirit beings (144)?

39
5. Will there ever be more or fewer angels than there are now? Why or why not
(144)?

6. What 2 passages (book/chapter) unite to teach that angels are higher creatures
than men (145)?

7. What passage (book/verse) teaches that originally angels were holy creatures
(145)?

8. What passage (book/chapter) refers to elect angels (145)?

9. What is Ryries conclusion regarding the nature of angels following their
probationary test (145)?

CHAPTER 20: THE ORGANIZATION OF ANGELS

1. What is meant by myriads in Hebrews 12:22 and Revelation 5:11 (146)?

2. What practical point does Ryrie make from the organization of angels and
demons (146)?

3. Who is the only angel designated as an archangel in Scripture (146)?

4. What does Jude 9 say about Michael (147)?

5. What are the 5 expressions the NT uses to describe the governmental rulers
among the angels (147)?

6. To what angelic order did Satan belong, and what is the function of this order
(148)?

7. What is the function of the seraphim (148)?

8. What was Gabriels special function (148)?
40
9. What are the 2 possible interpretations of the angels of the churches in
Revelation 23 (149)?

CHAPTER 21: THE MINISTRY OF ANGELS

1. What is the primary ministry of angels in relation to God (150)?

2. When do angels appear to be unusually active? Give examples (150-51).

3. In what 4 ways were angels active during the earthly life of Christ (151)?

4. Which angel guards Israel (152)?

5. What verse identifies the angels basic ministry of helping believers (152)?

6. What 5 specific ministries have angels performed in helping believers (152)?

7. What reason does Ryrie suggest for the angels observing of the conduct of
redeemed people (153)?

CHAPTER 22: THE REALITY OF SATAN

1. What are Ryries 3 arguments for the personality of Satan (157-58)?

2. What is the significance of the following names given to Satan (158-60)?
Satan:
Devil:
Serpent:
Great red dragon:
Accuser of the brethren:
Tempter:
Beelzebul:
Belial:

41
CHAPTER 23: THE CREATION AND SIN OF SATAN

1. What is Ryries interpretation of Ezekiel 28, and what are the 5 points he makes
from the passage regarding Satans original position (162-63)?

2. What is the only verse in the Bible that states exactly the origin of sin (163)?

3. How does Ryrie explain the relation between sin and Gods eternal plan
(163-64)?

4. What was Satans particular sin, according to 1 Timothy 3:6 (164)?

5. What is Ryries interpretation of Isaiah 14, and what are the 5 I wills of Satan
that he draws from this passage (164-65)?

6. What NT passage (book/chapter) refers to the fall of Satan (164)?

7. What is the meaning of the Hebrew term translated Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12
(164)?

8. What was Satans plan in rebelling against God (164)?

CHAPTER 24: THE ACTIVITIES OF SATAN

1. According to Ryrie, what was the basic purpose of Christs temptation (167)?

2. In what 3 specific areas did Satan tempt Christ, and to what 3 categories of
general temptation do these correspond (167)?

3. What is the principal tactic Satan uses to attack God and His program (168)?

4. What is Satans principal activity in relation to nations, and how does he perform
this activity (169)?

5. What are 3 areas in which Satan tempts believers (169-70)?
42
6. In what 3 areas does Satan accuse and oppose believers (170)?

CHAPTER 25: SATANS WORLD

1. In whose writings do most of the occurrences of the word cosmos appear (172)?

2. What are the 3 facets to the theological definition of the cosmos (172)?

3. What is Satans aim in the cosmos, and how does he achieve this aim (173)?

4. What are Ryries 3 points regarding the Christian and the cosmos, and what 2
guidelines does he give for being properly related to it (174-75)?

CHAPTER 26: THE REALITY OF DEMONS

1. How does Ryrie establish that Christ believed in the existence of demons (179)?

2. What evidence does Ryrie cite for concluding that demons are fallen angels
(181)?

3. What are the 3 possible interpretations of the sin mentioned in Genesis 6:2-4
(182)?

4. What are the various categories of demons, with Scripture references
(book/chapter; chart on 183)?

CHAPTER 27: WHAT ARE DEMONS LIKE?

1. What 4 facts indicate that demons are genuine persons (184)?

2. How has the knowledge of demons been enhanced by experience (185)?

3. What 4 expressions indicate the immoral nature of demons (185)?

43
CHAPTER 28: WHAT DO DEMONS DO?

1. What are 4 examples of Gods use of demons to carry out His purposes (187)?

2. What 3 false doctrines do demons teach (188)?

3. What principle regarding the activity of demons should be drawn from Daniel
10:13 and Revelation 16:13-16 (188)?

4. What 3 activities do demons perform in relation to people (188-89)?

5. What 2 suggestions does Ryrie give after surveying the biblical data relative to
demon possession (191-92)?
45
APPENDIX A

WHAT IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD?
BY EDWARD M. PANOSIAN, PH.D.

Because some otherwise good men
have become authors of confusion
concerning translations and versions of
the Holy Bible, we, as a people of God in
this twenty-first century of grace, may
profit from remembering what the
history of the Church of Jesus Christ has
known concerning that blessed Book.
The psalmist (Ps. 68:11) declared: The
Lord gave the word: great was the
company of those that published it.
The apostle (2 Tim. 3:16a) pronounced:
All scripture is given by inspiration of
God. God breathed, and what His
chosen writers wrote were the exact
words of the Word of God, as holy
men of God spake as they were moved
by the Holy Ghost (2 Pet. 1:21b).
God gave it and men published it.
But centuries before publish had come
to mean to set in type, print, bind, and
distribute, the scattering of the Word
was by preaching and proclaiming and
by copying by hand (manuscripting) the
words receivedthe law, the prophe-
cies, the histories, the epistles. With
meticulous care the Old Testament
books were handed down as disci-
plined and devoted scribes labored to
copy the sacred writings onto vellum
rolls. Wearing clean, fresh clothing,
using new pens, counting words on
pages, repeating the last word on the
previous page as the first word of the
next to guard against an omission,
destroying inaccurate and worn-out
copies, conscious that they were
handling Gods Word to man, faithful
men accomplished, under the continu-
ing illumination of the Holy Spirit of
God, the preservation and transmission
of that Word.
Notice here the principle of the
economy of God. God uses men. He
who could command angels to do His
bidding uses menyet it is God that
worketh. Just as men were vehicles
through which He chose to give the
Word, so also were men given the
responsibility to hand down to each
subsequent generation that same Word.
Yet God guaranteed His Word, because
for ever . . . settled in heaven (Ps.
119:89), would never be lost. We have
no golden plates let down from heaven,
which God knew men would worship
more than the God who gave them; we
have the living Word of God. Our not
having the original autograph manu-
scripts written by the human Bible
writers is no more a hindrance to our
knowledge of the words of God than the
destruction of the original copy of the
Declaration of Independence would be
to our knowledge of its very words. The
copies of both are legion; and, far more,
the Bible is preserved by God.
The text of the Hebrew Old
Testament was a settled question
already in Christs day. It was accepted
by the Jews, by the Christians, and by
Christ Himself. The matter of dispute
today among those who should be
brethren in obedience to the Word of
God is the text of the New Testament,
the Greek text. Since the New Testament
was written almost fourteen centuries
before movable type printing was in use
in the Western world, all copies were
necessarily made by hand by careful
46
scribes. Obviously, minor differences
appeared among these, in spite of the
best efforts of good men. But with
hundreds of manuscriptsactually
thousandsavailable today, we can say
with certainty that we have every word
of the Word of God.
The majority of the Greek
manuscripts known and available in the
early sixteenth century were of what
was called the Byzantine text. It was
these that were used by the Roman
Catholic scholar Desiderius Erasmus of
Rotterdam in the sixteenth century to
publish the first printed edition of the
Greek New Testament. These available
manuscripts differed slightly from one
another, were comparatively few in
number, and the oldest among them
dated back only to the tenth or eleventh
centuries.
The competition growing among
enterprising printers in that sixteenth
century, only a few decades after the
introduction of the concept of movable
print into western Europe, led one of
their number to prevail upon Erasmus
to hasten the completion of this project
of preparing a Greek text for publica-
tion. Having at his disposal only one
manuscript that contained the Book of
Revelation, lacking completely the last
six verses, Erasmus boldly translated
those verses into Greek from his Roman
Catholic Latin Vulgate Bible. In so
doing, he introduced words into the
Greek text that exist in no Greek
manuscript. These words are still in the
Textus Receptus, this so-called text
received by all (Textus Receptus
Omnibusalthough the by all has
long since been dropped, never having
been true), to which some ill-informed
saints today give unquestioned alle-
giance as if it had come directly from the
fingers of God.
The honest reader deserves to know
about this Erasmus. To Erasmus
prince of sixteenth century humanists,
scholar extraordinary, aloof from parti-
san labels, from whom a letter would be
prized, framed, and handed down as an
heirloom, the darling of fawning princes
and pedantsto him, I say, Christianity
was a way of life, not dogma or creed.
This attitude would make him the hero
of modern theological pseudo-liberals
who disdain doctrine as divisive, but
embrace love as truth. Let there be no
mistake here: correct doctrine is empty
and sounding brass unless it is
accompanied by consistent Christian
behavior, but the latter is impossible
without the former.
Erasmus is a far cry from his
contemporary Martin Luther, who said,
Cursed be that unity for which the
Word of God must be put at stake.
Erasmus abhorred any reformation that
centered on doctrinal conviction and
resulted in schism. He once declared,
On no other account do I congratulate
myself more than on the fact that I have
never attached myself to any party.
While suggesting privately that Luthers
attacks were right, if too vehement, he
never took sides with the Bible-centered
reform against the pope-centered
corruption. The whole public testimony
of his life was in and with the greatest
curse of so-called Christendom, the
Roman Catholic Church.
By the seventeenth century in
England there had been several
translations made of the Bible. The
English reign of the Scottish King James
early in the century was the occasion for
the request that a standard transla-
tion, not theologically partisan nor re-
flecting an interpretive bias, be prepared
by the best and most pious scholars of
the realms. This project was seriously,
dutifully, and successfully undertaken,
47
producing the unparalleled King James
Version, the so-called Authorized
Version of the Bible, based essentially
on the Received Text.
This noble labor has been the
occasion for blessing to millions of
English readers for more than three
centuries. Although it was accepted
slowly at first because of its novelty,
generations have been reared on the
beauty of its cadences. It has been a tool
of instruction and education, of convic-
tion and conversion. Its language has
been memorized and quoted in litera-
ture and in speech. Scores of great
preachers have proclaimed its words as
they have preached the Word. In its
rhythms, its dignity, its simplicity; in the
richness of its language; and in the
directness of its tone, the King James
Version is without peer and need fear
no competition. None will ever take its
place.
But no version is inspired, except to
the degree that it conforms to the
original meaning of the words of the
original manuscripts. Fundamentalists
have always contended this. In the
series of publications known as The
Fundamentals, early in the 1900s, the
treatment of Inspiration of the Bible
contains this sentence: The record for
whose inspiration we contend is the
original recordthe autographs or
parchments of Moses, David, Daniel,
Matthew, Peter, or Paul as the case may
be and not any particular translation or
translations of them whatever.
In the nineteenth century a second
major text of the Greek New Testament
was edited by two Anglican clergy-
scholars, B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort,
using newly available manuscripts
called those of the Alexandrian text. The
importance of these was their antiquity;
while the Received Text was derived
from manuscripts of the late Middle
Ages, the Westcott-Hort Text was from
those of the fourth century. More
recently an older Greek manuscript
portion, Chester Beatys P46, dated
about A.D. 200, is of the same
Alexandrian textonly about a century
after John the Apostle wrote his Gospel.
The point here is that the older
manuscripts are closer to the originals
that the apostles wrote. Less time had
passed since the original writing; the
manuscripts had been copied fewer
times, and, therefore, there had been
fewer occasions for copyists mistakes to
be introduced. All this would make for
greater accuracy and a more faithful
reproduction of the original in a text of
the second or fourth century than in one
of the tenth or twelfth. It is not the
number of manuscripts that is the issue,
but their antiquity.
Some sincere men today attempt to
discredit the older, more accurate text
because of the private correspondence
of Dr. Hort, some of which reflects his
speculations about certain doctrines.
The assumption, quite correctly, is that
an evil tree cannot bear good fruit.
There are two problems here: deciding
what is an evil tree and assuming that
the fruit derives from the tree. The
second of these is clearer: Westcott and
Hort did not produce the fruit; they only
compiled the text from the oldest
known extant manuscripts. God gave
the Word, not Westcott and Hort. No
Greek manuscript of the New Testament
is evil unless one has deliberately re-
moved from it essential Christian
doctrine that has been the consensus of
believers for all the Christian centuries.
To speak of the Greek New Testament
either the Received Text or the Westcott-
Hort Textas an evil thing is a strange
kind of blasphemy against the Word of
God, which God has exalted above His
very name.
48
The second question regards the
evil of the tree. It is natural to
evaluate a dead mans position on
matters spiritual by reference to his
published works and his life
associations. Westcott and Hort were
Anglicans of the nineteenth century. As
such, they believed some denomina-
tional interpretations, like baptismal
regeneration, which most of us would
think wrong. But they were in the
Protestant communion, which most of
us would think far more nearly right
than the Romanism of Erasmus. It is a
strange matter indeed when some of
todays Baptists, for example, are found
applauding the work of a Romanist as
divinely inspired, while spewing out the
work of an Anglican Protestant as a
satanic work. There are strange bed-
fellows there.
While I have no brief for and see no
need to defend Westcott and Hort, let us
set the matter straight. The published
works of a lifetime show these men to
have been unjustly accused on the basis
of youthful speculations. Westcott
honored and defended the deity of
Christ, His virgin birth, His bodily
resurrection, His miracles, the virtue of
His blood, and many other doctrines in
many commentaries throughout his
long and useful life. His works The
Gospel According to St. John and The
Epistle to the Hebrews are notable
examples. Hort also defends the
doctrine of the Trinity, the vicarious
blood atonement, the equality of the
Father and the Son, and the resurrection
of Jesus Christ in his works The
Apocalypse of St. John I-II and The First
Epistle of St. Peter I:1-II:17. In the light of
these teachings and the published
positions of these men, it is not possible
to call them unorthodox or theologically
heretical.
A colleague has observed that the
greatest American Greek scholar, A. T.
Robertson, a strongly conservative
Baptist, defended the Alexandrian
(Westcott-Hort) text all his life. He noted
that the next greatest American Greek
scholar, J. Gresham Machen, a strongly
conservative Presbyterian, famous for
his classic defense of the doctrine of the
virgin birth of Christ, also defended the
same text. These men, and others like
them, living or dead, cannot be called
liberals or unbelievers.
Neither the Received Text nor the
Westcott-Hort Text is either right or
wrong, liberal or conservative. The latter
is older and nearer to the original, but
both are the Word of the living God.
The differences between them are more
exaggerated than numerous. The por-
tion of the Greek New Testament about
which there is any substantial variation
among the various manuscripts is only
about one word in a thousand (a total of
1/2 page in a 500-page book). And no
doctrine is affected by these variations;
no doctrine is dependent on a single
word in a single place. Where the word
Christ may not be in one place in a
manuscript, it is found in hundreds of
other places. There are no significant
variations in readings in any of the
manuscripts for the vast majority of
verses.
In addition to the recovery of older
manuscripts since the Authorized
Version was translated in 1611, there is
the matter of changes in a living
language over these centuries. While
this is more a problem to the youth than
to the more mature reader, there is still
the natural desire of the layman for the
Bible in his own, everyday, spoken
language. This is what the King James
Version was three and one-half
centuries ago. Meanings and usages of
some English words have changed since
49
then and some words and phrases seem
archaic to the modern reader.
Although very few of these are
nevertheless unintelligible, there is the
continuing attraction of modern
speech versions. Also, the King James
Version itself is not today the same as it
was in 1611. Printers errors and
revisions over the years have produced
changes. A Dr. Paris of Cambridge in
1762 and a Dr. Blayney of Oxford in
1769 revised the spelling and grammar
of the King James Version, resulting in
over 70,000 details of difference from
the 1611 edition. I have seen the number
of changes in the Authorized Version
over the years estimated at from three or
four thousand to 75,000.
Here is the place for a very careful
and necessary warning. It concerns the
philosophy of translators. The desire
for common language versions and the
realization that even the standard
version has gone through many altera-
tions has resulted in a great number of
modern versions. Very few of these are
translations from the original languages.
Many, like the New English Bible and the
so-called Good News for Modern Man, are
efforts at transforming general ideas
into modern thought forms. They are to
be rejected as human productions.
Others, like the Phillipss version and
Taylors Living Bible, are essentially
paraphrases, not translations; these, too,
are to be rejected as the word of men.
Still others, like the Revised Standard
Version of 1946 and 1952, were the
works of theological liberals whose
infidelity was most clearly shown in
their watering down of messianic
passages relating especially to the virgin
birth of Christ; these are to be rejected as
untrustworthy and perversions. Some,
like the American Standard Version
(1901), the Amplified Bible (sometimes
more like a commentary than a transla-
tion), and the New American Standard
Bible (1971), are efforts by conservative
textual scholars at a faithful translation;
these are useful and often helpful for
study and clarification of meanings.
But not even these last few named
conservative translations are likely in
our lifetimeif everto supplant the
revered King James Version of the Bible.
Nor are they, strictly speaking, neces-
sary. They are rather the results of the
continuing desire of faithful textual
scholars, devoted to the inerrant, infal-
lible, inspired, preserved, and divinely
transmitted Word of God, to make use
of the results of the newest manuscript
discoveries, the increased knowledge of
the meanings of the koine
1
Greek lan-
guage, and to present the Bible in the
language of today. Yet the gospel of
Jesus Christ is crystal clear in any
faithful translation of the Bible.
To say that any version of the Bible is
specially inspired not only misses the
meaning of inspiration (to holy men of
old) but also raises simple questions of
logic. Where was the inspired Bible
before that particular version was
produced? What about the Bible for the
peopleGerman, French, and so on
who do not speak the language of that
particular version? Have they (the
majority of the worlds population) no
access to the Word of God, except
through a translation of that version?
And is not that version itself only a
translation from the original languages
of Scripture?
Why, then, all the controversy today
over Textus Receptus vs. Westcott-Hort?
Why the creation of confusion among
the people of God, very few of whom
possess the equipment of scholarly
expertise in the original languages to be
the textual critics they must be to judge
the validity of what a few sincere but
misguided men are insisting? Why are
50
suspicions being raised and divisions
being forced over matters relatively
unimportant? Why not agree to reject
paraphrases and perversions and let the
faithful Word of God accomplish the
purpose whereto the Lord sent it?
What reader does not, with the
writer, believe that the King James
Version, the Authorized Version of the
Bible, is the Bible in English, par
excellence, the noblest, the most quoted,
the most forceful in its appeal to the
heart, virtually the only version men
have memorized, and that it will always
be so? Who wouldwho could with
any hearingdetract from its virtues?
Who should fearwho, rather, should
not welcomethe efforts of godly men
to come even more closely to the
original text because of the increasing
embarrassment of riches of manu-
scripts? Of what ancient classical work,
of nearly the same antiquity, do we
possess as much as one percent of the
number of manuscripts that we do of
the New Testament? There is none.
Have not we ample reason to praise the
God of heaven for His infinite power
and goodness and wisdom in giving to
man for all timeand for all eternity
such a treasure?
Is there not compelling reason today
to emphasize rather the authority of the
Word of God? In a time when the
leaders of Christendom are doing what
is right in their own eyesshould we
not call our brethren to obedience to the
Word of the living God? Have not those
who are today making a test of
fellowship over one good New Testa-
ment text vs. another good one not gone
chasing a rabbit trail instead of the
possum they are supposed to be
hunting?
Let us read the Bible with blessing.
Let us yield to the Bibles authority with
submission. Let us obey the Bibles
commands with thanksgiving. Let us
serve the Bibles Author with faith-
fulness. God has given us His Word
He has set before us an abundant meal
of sweet and delicious herbs; let us not
be botanistslet us eat. Let us be able to
say with Jeremiah, Thy words were
found, and I did eat them; and thy word
was unto me the joy and rejoicing of
mine heart: for I am called by thy name,
O Lord God of hosts (Jer. 15:16).

1
Commonly spoken language of the first
century, in which the New Testament
manuscripts were written.

Dr. Panosian served for fifty years as
professor of history and church history at
Bob Jones University.

1979, Bob Jones University Press.
Reproduced by permission.
Further reproduction prohibited.

51
APPENDIX B

LIGHT ON THE BIBLE TEXT DEBATE
BY THURMAN WISDOM, PH.D.

Controversies are inevitable among
Christians. No doubt, some disputes are un-
necessary, and some are clearly unpro-
fitable. Nevertheless, they are inevitable,
and it is our lot, as it was Jobs and Pauls,
to seek for light in the midst of the heat.
Unfortunately, thus far in the KJV contro-
versy, there has been more heat than light,
and confusion abounds.
The issue is confusing to many because
of the nature of the research involved.
Textual criticismthe examination and
classification of ancient documentsis a
highly specialized field that demands
considerably more devotion than most
people are willing to give it. Consequently,
most Christians have very little knowledge
of the textual procedures involved in
deciphering and classifying the New
Testament manuscripts. Yet, Gods people
everywhere are being summoned to battle
over these textual theories. It is imperative,
therefore, that Christians become informed,
at least of the major arguments and issues
involved.
THE KJV GROUPS
Much of the confusion results from the
fact that there are diverse sub-groups
within the KJV position that often are not
distinguished, particularly by opponents of
the view.
The English Version Groups. A number
of KJV advocates hold that the King James
Version is an absolutely perfect translation.
In fact, according to Peter Ruckman, the
KJV is superior to the originals, for even the
renderings that, strictly speaking, are
inaccurate have turned out to be
marvelous undesigned coincidences
which have slipped through the A. V. 1611
committees, unawares to them, and which
give advanced light, and advanced
revelation (Handbook of Manuscript Evi-
dence, p. 127).
The same writer depicts the Holy Spirit
not only as guiding the KJV translators
word for word but also (in words generally
reserved only for the originals) as writing
the English words as well: The Holy Spirit,
knowing that the greatest Imitator of God
was Satan . . . wrote, be ye followers. If this
is not the Greek text, the Greek text is
wrong (Handbook, p. 136). The reference is
to Ephesians 5:1, where the Received Text,
the Westcott-Hort text, and every extant
Greek manuscript has mimetai, imitators
rather than akolouthountes, followers.
Thus, the writer is saying either that Paul
wrote the wrong word or that the word he
wrote became wrong when the KJV was
published.
This position is clearly the weakest of
the three levels. It has been repudiated, in
varying degrees, by most KJV advocates as
well as by Westcott-Hort proponents. It
demands a dogma of multiple inspiration:
that God not only breathed His words
infallibly through the original authors of
Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16) but also repeated the
process each time the Word of God was
translated.
Furthermore, it ignores the fact that
variations in wording have appeared in
different editions of the King James Version.
As late as the nineteenth century, the
American Bible Society found some 24,000
variations in wording and punctuation in
six editions of the KJV, and even today
there are minor variations in spelling in
52
different editions of the Authorized Version
(Jack P. Lewis, The English Bible from KJV to
NIV, pp. 39-40). Of course, these insigni-
ficant variants have not affected Bible
believers in the slightest. The fact that God
has allowed the variations to exist in the
KJV and in all other translations should
demonstrate that He has not made any one
translation perfect in every detail.
The Received Text Group. Other KJV
advocates hold that the King James trans-
lation itself may not be verbally perfect, but
the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts on
which it is based contain no errors. There
are variations of the spelling of words in the
majority text or Textus Receptus, but there
are no errors. If we allow one error, how do
we know there are not others? (Thomas E.
Baker, pamphlet, Will the True Fundamen-
talist Please Stand Up?)
This view, though it is more reasonable
than the preceding one, has some very
serious problems. It is an undeniable fact
that no two extant manuscripts of the Bible
are exactly alike and, though the vast
majority of the variations are inconse-
quential, it simply is not true that only
spelling variations appear.
Even editions of the Received Text have
variations more substantial than spelling
differences. Of the eighteen editions of the
Textus Receptus published between 1516 and
1710, no two are exactly alike. Erasmuss
first two editions did not contain I John 5:7.
The text published by Stephanus, on which
the King James Version is based, differed
from the famous Textus Receptus edition of
Elzevir in close to 300 places. Likewise,
modern editions have variations: for
example, Berrys widely recommended
interlinear Received Text does not contain
Luke 17:36.
The Majority Text Group. The Majority
Text view is without question the most
reasonable and viable of the KJV positions.
Proponents in this camp hold that the
readings found in the majority of the extant
Greek manuscripts, and/or those tradi-
tionally accepted by Christians, are the true
ones. In contrast with the other KJV
theories, this view has won the support of a
number of qualified conservative textual
scholars.
The discussion that follows will
concentrate on the Majority Text position as
it compares with the Westcott-Hort theory.
THE CENTRAL ISSUE
The key issue between Majority Text
and Westcott-Hort proponents concerns
how much weight should be given to the
manuscripts discovered or made available
since the publishing of Erasmuss Textus
Receptus.
Many of the more recently discovered
manuscripts are several centuries older than
the manuscripts of Erasmuss day.
Westcott-Hort advocates hold that generally
these older witnesses (the Alexandrian
manuscripts) are the purest. They say that
the manuscripts Erasmus used (the
Byzantine) show signs of conflations
words or phrases added by scribes who,
perhaps out of fear of omitting something,
combined the readings of two variant
manuscripts. For example, in Luke 24:53
some manuscripts read, praising God;
others read, blessing God; and a number
read, praising and blessing God.
Westcott-Hort advocates would say that
though the scribes may have had good
intentions, nevertheless, they added to the
Word of God, and we should utilize the
light given by the oldest manuscripts to
help us return to the precise wording of the
originals.
Majority Text proponents repudiate this
approach. They say that it is inconse-
quential that the Alexandrian manuscripts
are older. The Byzantine manuscripts are
much more numerous, and the fact that
they are so numerous indicates that they
represent the true line of manuscripts
accepted by Christians down through the
53
centuries. The Alexandrian manuscripts,
they say, are representatives of a corrupt
line of manuscripts that were set aside by
true Christians.
Thus, in general, the Westcott-Hort
proponents hold that the oldest manuscripts
are the purest and that the later Byzantine
manuscripts contain additions to the true
Word of God. Majority Text advocates hold
that the Byzantine manuscripts, as
representatives of the majority, are the
nearest to the originals, and the
Alexandrian manuscripts contain deletions
from the Word of God. Of course, this
generalization is an oversimplification. In
practice, Westcott-Hort advocates some-
times evaluate later readings as more
accurate than the older, and Majority Text
defenders sometimes favor readings sup-
ported by a minority of manuscripts.
THE FOCUS OF THE CONTROVERSY
Scholars on both sides of the KJV
controversy acknowledge that there is no
question at all about ninety percent of the
readings in the manuscripts. They also
agree that virtually all of the variations in
manuscripts are inconsequentialconcern-
ing such matters as spelling differences,
word order, and obvious scribal blunders.
In about two percent of the cases, there are
variations involving the number of times
theological terms and names appear in
certain manuscripts. About a half dozen of
the differences reflect substantial varia-
tions involving whole verses.
Thus, the whole controversy is over
variations in approximately two percent of
the verses of the New Testament. It should
be recognized that the differences in
question are variations between orthodox
manuscripts. Not one of the over five
thousand manuscripts extant is unorthodox.
The manuscripts differ in quality and
neatness, and for the most part they differ
slightly in the number of times certain
words and phrases appear. However,
virtually any combination of manuscripts
gives repeated and emphatic testimony of
all of the truths of the Bible. Heretical
mutilations of Scripture, such as that of
Marcion (ca. A.D. 150), have existed in the
past, but not one is extant today. So the
question is not Which manuscripts are
doctrinally orthodox? The question is
Which manuscripts best accord with the
originals and thus best reflect the doctrine
of preservation?
THE ARGUMENTS
Most of the arguments currently
circulating are attacks on or refutations of
the Westcott-Hort theory. Therefore, I will
simply summarize two of the most common
KJV arguments and then present the
Westcott-Hort defense. My object is not to
convert anyone; it is simply to set before
the reader the basic arguments of both
sides. Space does not allow for a thorough
presentation with detailed arguments,
refutations, and counter-refutations.
A Providentially Approved Version.
Majority Text advocates argue that God has
put His seal of approval on the Textus
Receptus for nearly 400 years. He has used
the Received Text and the KJV exclusively
to bring every modern revival for the past
three centuries. It is inconceivable, they say,
that God would now set aside the text He
has so abundantly blessed.
However, the Septuagint was the
received text of the Old Testament among
Greek-speaking Jews and among Christians
for several hundred yearseven though it
departs from the Hebrew Masoretic
(received) text in many places. In western
Europe the Latin Vulgate was the received
text for over one thousand years.
During these centuries, people spoke of
the Septuagint and the Vulgate in much the
same way as people speak of the King
James Version today. Both translations were
regarded as absolutely perfect. Irenaeus and
other early church fathers held that the
54
Septuagint translators worked indepen-
dently in isolated rooms, yet miraculously
produced verbally identical translations.
Augustine regarded the Septuagint as
apostolically sanctioned and inspired, and
he urged Jerome to translate the Old Testa-
ment from it rather than from the Hebrew
Masoretic Text (Philip Schaff, History of the
Christian Church, III, 975).
When the time came for a better
translation to replace the venerable Vulgate,
many regarded as heresy the implication
that Jeromes translation might not be letter-
perfect. The words of Erasmuss friend,
Dorpius, are typical of the attitude of that
day:
It is unreasonable to suppose that the
universal Church has been in error for
so many generations in her use of this
edition; nor is it probable that so many
holy Fathers have been mistaken, who
in reliance upon it, have defined the
most arduous questions in General
Councils. (John A. Faulkner, Erasmus the
Scholar, p. 127)
A Question of Doctrinal Soundness. The
most serious charge leveled against the
Westcott-Hort Greek text is that it
undermines and even denies important
biblical doctrines. The indictment focuses
largely on instances in which such terms as
blood, repentance, and Christ are
omitted from the Westcott-Hort text.
Several books and pamphlets on the subject
suggest these omissions are the result of a
conspiracy to undermine the great doctrines
of the Faith. It is argued that Westcott and
Hort themselves were rank heretics and that
the Greek text they edited is the product of
a heretical line of manuscripts.
Westcott-Hort proponents respond that
the manuscripts they regard as best simply
do not include all the theological terms in
the same places as the Byzantine manu-
scripts. It is not a question at all of deli-
berate omissions, much less of a conspiracy.
In any combination of manuscripts, even if
the worst were chosen by design, they
would affirm again and again all the theo-
logical concepts that are in the Received
Text. Thus, if any of the manuscripts extant
represent a conspiracy to undermine the
deity of Christ or any of the great doctrines
of the Faith, the conspirators were without
question the most inept and incompetent
who ever lived. Some modern translations
do indeed undermine biblical doctrines, but
this has resulted from prejudicial interpre-
tation, not from corrupt manuscripts.
A LOST BIBLE?
If the Christian cause hinges on the
universal acceptance of either the Westcott-
Hort theory or the Majority Text theory, we
are all in very serious trouble, for it would
take a Protestant pope to settle the issue
once and for all. There are outstanding
scholars and men of unquestionable ortho-
doxy on both sides of the issue. Neither side
can claim a champion who knows enough
about the facts of history and the mysteries
of Providence to enable him to prove his
theory conclusively.
Neither Westcott-Hort advocates nor
Majority Text advocates can justly claim (as
some have attempted) that their theory
meets the stern requirements of such verses
as Matthew 5:18, for the verse insists that
not one jot or one tittle of the law shall pass
away; whereas theorists in both camps
freely acknowledge that even the
manuscripts they judge to be the best have
variations in themsome jots and tittles
have passed away from all extant manu-
scripts.
It must be remembered, however, that
the Word of God existed before there were
any physical manuscripts, and it will exist
long after all manuscripts perish (Ps. 119:89;
2 Pet. 3:10-12). It cannot be bound geogra-
phically, and it cannot be bound physically.
On one occasion the only extant
manuscript of the words of Jeremiah the
prophet was cut into pieces and cast into a
55
fire until all the roll was consumed (Jer.
36:23). Does that mean that a portion of the
Word of God had perished? No. Jehoiakim
did not destroy the Word of God, or any
part of it, even for a moment. The words
had gone forth from Jehovah, and they
could not be bound by kings or armies or
elements. If anything, Jehoiakims insolent
action increased the revelation of Gods
Word, for when the words of the destroyed
scroll were rewritten, there were added
besides unto them many like words
(36:32).
But how can the average Christian,
unequipped for Greek textual study, handle
the question of which variationsor which
theory concerning variationsis right?
Basically, as he handles interpretational
questions. For example, in Romans 5:1,
some manuscripts support the KJV
rendering, We have peace with God;
others support the translation let us have
peace with God. But even the words of the
King James Version can be interpreted as
including a let us exhortationthat
Christians should enjoy peace with God (just
as the words, we glory in tribulations,
verse 3, include a tacit exhortation that we
should glory in tribulations). Fundamentally,
most of the manuscript variations amount
to little more than interpretational
questionsquestions concerning the
emphases in the passage. Moreover, margi-
nal references to manuscript variations need
not be accepted any more than marginal
interpretational notes. Every believer is a
priest of God, and ultimately he alone is
responsible for his reaction to the Word.
Every Christian is responsible, also, to
maintain a humble, teachable spirit. All
Christians cannot be manuscript experts.
All are dependent to some extent on the
gifts of others.
The greatest danger this controversy
imposes upon us is that the focus on which
theory best preserves the jots and tittles
may blind us to the real message of the
Lord when He uttered the promise of
Matthew 5:18. That message is found in the
following verse: Whosoever therefore shall
break one of these least commandments,
and shall teach men so, he shall be called
the least in the kingdom of heaven: but
whosoever shall do and teach them, the
same shall be called great in the kingdom of
heaven. True orthodoxy consists not only
in holding to the doctrine of verbal
inspiration and preservation but also in
obeying even the very least of the com-
mandments of God.

Dr. Wisdom is Dean Emeritus of
the School of Religion at Bob Jones University.

1984, Bob Jones University Press.
Reproduced by permission.
Further reproduction prohibited.

Bi 401 Study Guide

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Bi 401 Study Guide

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

School of Religion

Você também pode gostar