restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

The IRS Claims New Patriot Act Type Powers to Punish Political Dissenters

Robert R. Raymond

In a precedent-setting case, the IRS wielded new power to punish the political speech of those who “espouse views” the government considers “inconsistent” with government-held beliefs. In a hearing originally closed to the public in a secret tribunal on a military island, but moved to a public location after protests from the press and the public, the IRS wants to wield this power against a former IRS whistleblower who was forced to resign upon his discovery of fraud in the agency. After monitoring and taping the whistleblower’s appearances on Sixty Minutes, talk radio shows, and political publications where he rebroadcast his findings of IRS fraud, the IRS initiated this inquisition against their former whistleblower. This new power may find new political targets soon enough.

The IRS, through the small office of “Director of Practice,” claims the authority to wield carte blanche authority over all the other powers of government—the authority to monitor, surveil, and eavesdrop on political dissenters, the authority to pry into the private financial records of banks, businesses, and taxpayers, the authority to conduct secret investigations under a criminal grand jury, and the authority to censure political dissenters by branding on them a badge of infamy and stripping them of governmentally-protected licenses. In short, under the guise of a “practice” investigation, the IRS claims the right to wield all intrusive and invasive powers of government available.

A “license” to practice before the IRS—even for people who have never requested such a license or actually practiced before the IRS, but are given one as a matter of law if they are accountants—“licenses” the IRS to conduct private audits without notice to the taxpayer, confer with criminal prosecutors without disclosure, and bring special “disbarment” proceedings against disfavored dissenters, even if the alleged “disreputable” conduct has nothing to do with any “practice” before the IRS.

The IRS now claims it can use these so-called “practice” investigations of anyone who Congress licenses to practice before the IRS—regardless of whether they actually practice before the IRS—to surveil the public appearances of dissenters, eavesdrop on the political conversations of dissenters, benefit from secret grand jury investigations, hold secret conferences with the criminal investigators, surreptiously tap the private database of taxpayer information, including taxpayers who merely have some financial “connection” to the accused, audit the political dissenter’s personal financial records, and use all this information against the dissenter in the “practice” proceeding.

Under the guise of a “practice” investigation, the IRS can ignore all the normal procedural protections against an illicit audit while it conducts such an audit. Simultaneously, the IRS can ignore all the legal protections afforded a person accused of a crime while conferencing with the people conducting a criminal investigation. Indeed, the IRS can even ignore the sunshine laws, as the records of such “practice investigation” are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, as are grand jury proceedings. 

The IRS claims it can exercise this authority in a secret proceeding without allowing a person the opportunity to cure any alleged mistakes, the opportunity to prepare a defense by knowing the exact facts they are accused of, without any opportunity for discovery, without any opportunity to call witnesses necessary for their defense, without any opportunity to cross examine their accusers, without any opportunity to testify at their own hearing about the merits of their position, without being forced to testify against themselves without such an assertion being held against them, and without even an opportunity for a hearing on the evidence.

This power of this little office with a Napoleonic vision goes even beyond the Patriot Act type authority and stories of FBI monitoring of war protestors. 

Too Hoover-ish to be true in modern America?  Just read the case of the IRS against Joe Banister scheduled for a “hearing”— a hearing where the IRS prohibited Banister from introducing any witnesses or presenting any evidence as to his defenses, and even discussing the sincerity, the truth or the “reasonableness” of his positions—on December 1 in the city by the bay, in the Tax Court chambers of the federal courthouse in San Francisco. History is being made.

November 28, 2003

Robert R. Raymond is the past Independent candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives for Wisconsin’s 5th District in the 2002 elections. A political activist for the past eight years he represents the People for Truth in Taxation Organization. He can be reached by e-mail at rr@rraymond.org. Republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

The Iraqi War and Christian Convictions

David Alan Black

For many years now a large segment of the American population has felt that government must have no interaction with religion at all. They cite Thomas Jefferson, claiming he originated the metaphor of a hard and fast wall of separation between church and state in America. Of course, Mr. Jefferson himself had no trouble distinguishing between the unconstitutional establishment of religion and religion itself. In the very letter he wrote to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, in which he mentioned the “wall of separation,” he added, “I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of all man.” Keep in mind that Jefferson was writing as President of the United States.

Clearly Thomas Jefferson did not exclude religion from the American scene, including government (cf. my essay “The Christian as Citizen”). However, it is always dangerous to claim that America is a Christian nation or to say that nations are enemies of God simply because they are enemies of America. Indeed, an all too constant danger in American politics is the tendency to confuse the kingdoms of this world with the kingdom of Christ.

This has implications for the so-called just war doctrine. While American evangelicals tend to speak evil of the Muslim concept of Jihad (which, for radical Muslims, means “holy war”), they also have a dangerous tendency to view nearly any US military action as a “holy war.” American foreign policy has become laden in recent days with rhetorical overtones of a war between Christ (America and her allies) and Anti-Christ (the current enemy).

In his State of the Union address earlier this year, for example, President Bush quoted an evangelical hymn that refers to the Christian Gospel. He applied it, however, not to the Gospel, but to the American people. “‘There’s power, wonder-working power,’ in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people,” he said. The hymn, of course, does not refer to any supposed goodness in the heart of man (which is “desperately wicked” according to the Psalmist), but to the power of the blood of Christ—and there is a huge difference between the two. The Gospel of Jesus Christ, in fact, clearly teaches that the line separating good and evil runs, not along national borders, but inside every human heart.

If we are not careful in these days of war, we might well become guilty of the worst sort of evil the Bible condemns—pride and arrogance. We may end up thinking that we are a godly nation (which we never have been), and that all nations who oppose us are ungodly. Such thinking is perhaps what lies behind what one evangelical leader recently said with reference to the President’s frequent remarks about the US leading the fight of good against evil in the world: “Saddam Hussein is evil, and compared to him we are pure and good.” America “pure and good”? Not the last time I checked!

Aldous Huxley, author of Brave New World, once noted that the human choice is not between having or not having a metaphysical belief, but between a good and bad metaphysic. He said that faith, like nature, abhors a vacuum. Man has to worship something; and when God is ruled out, he’ll substitute sex or the arts or sports—or the state. Interestingly, an earlier attack on Iraq was named “Operation Ultimate Justice,” claiming in effect that America was God!

Michael Horton, in an excellent essay, recently commented on the sad legacy in Christianity of confusing the kingdom of God with the kingdoms of this world. He writes that “…no nation can claim God as its political protector—if not the modern nation-state of Israel, then certainly not the United States. God does not covenant with nations, but (according to Revelation 5:9) with believing families ‘from every tribe, kindred, tongue, people and nation’ who together constitute ‘a kingdom of priests to our God.’ And if no nation can claim God’s blessing in general, then it cannot presume on God’s blessings with respect to war in particular.”

Neither Horton nor I would deny a place for a Christian understanding of just war as elucidated by Augustine and others. But what many evangelicals forget is that the theory of just war also makes it clear that no wars are divinely authorized in this age, and therefore any declaration of war made by a secular state must eschew any notion of holy war.

Among other things, this understanding means that western nations, including the United States, are fully capable of engaging in unjust aggression and committing flagrant atrocities against civilian populations. The brutal war of aggression in 1861 that cost the lives of 620,000 American combatants (not to mention the many thousands of civilian deaths), the genocide of the native American populations, and the indiscriminate fire bombing of German cities (Dresden, for example) hardly puts the federal government in a position to lecture others about the conventions of war or rules of morality. Also, recall our intentional destruction of Iraq’s water purification facilities during the Gulf War, despite Article 554 of the Geneva Convention, which states: “It is prohibited to attack, destroy or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,” including “drinking water supplies and irrigation works.” In 2000, UNICEF’s director for Iraq announced that a half million children under five years of age had died during the 10 years of American-led UN sanctions against Iraq. In 1998 alone, UN officials reported that the embargo of Iraqi water purification supplies and equipment was killing 4-5,000 children per month.

My point is not that war is never justified, but rather that there is no monolithic “Christian” or “Evangelical” or “Baptist” position on war, including the question of whether we should have gone to war against Iraq in the first place. Throughout its two-thousand-year history, Christianity has justified, rationalized, restrained, and informed the conduct of warfare. Christians have, in various times and by various means, both upheld and departed from biblical standards, and both ecclesiastical and secular leaders have appealed to Christianity’s teachings for personal and national guidance and support.

American evangelicals need to remember that the mission of the church between the two advents of Christ is uniquely a missionary enterprise. As Horton puts it, “Christians can and should be concerned about and involved in civil affairs, including patriotic support for troops, but in no way confusing national interests with the kingdom of God.”

(“There is power in the blood.” Pfc. David Kurns is baptized by Task Force Chaplain Capt. Ron Cooper, left, and 1st Lt. Brian Case, right, in the desert north of Kuwait City, Wednesday, March 12. Eight members of the 3rd Infantry Division were baptized in the desert last Wednesday. Photo posted on Dixieinternet.com.)

All this to say the obvious. I have no doubt that this war, as Pat Buchanan has noted, will change the world as we know it forever. The threat of American imperialism, which I have been writing about for several months now, will remain as dangerous as ever. Even as we continue to hold a sober and rational debate over these issues that are vital to America’s future, I agree with Buchanan that it is time to clearly state our support for our troops under arms. Let us pray fervently for the protection of our military in Iraq and for the establishment of a just peace in that land. But let us always keep first things first. The “wonder-working power” of God does not consist of Cruise Missiles or Bradley Fighting Vehicles or our man-made visions of Utopia, but the precious blood of the Lamb.

March 21, 2003

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Iraq: The Perfect Storm

 David Alan Black 

I firmly believe that the Bible is as up-to-date as the daily newspaper. So when I read Acts 27:13-14 today, I couldn’t help thinking about the mess in Iraq one year after the capture of Saddam Hussein.

The master of the ship thought Paul’s voyage to Rome would be quick and easy. Paul had warned him of impending danger, but the master ignored him. A soft south wind blew, and away they went, “supposing that they had obtained their purpose.” But soon they encountered “a tempestuous wind, called Euroclydon” (Acts 27:14). The resulting shipwreck almost cost them their lives.

When Saddam Hussein was captured last year, President Bush declared, “In the history of Iraq, a dark and painful era is over.” General John Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, said the capture had dealt the insurgency “a huge psychological blow” that would “pay great benefits over time.” The commander of the 4th Infantry Division, Major General Jay Odierno, whose troops had captured Saddam, declared the insurgency to be “on its knees.” “Within six months I think you’re going to see some normalcy,” he added.

One year later, Iraq is in chaos. Here are the cold, hard facts:

• More American soldiers have died in Iraq since Saddam’s capture than before.
• Insurgent attacks across the country last month averaged 100 a day – nearly double July’s figure when they were supposed to be vanishing.
• The threat of kidnapping is now so common that no Westerner dares walk the streets of any town.
• The Pentagon is increasing troop numbers in Iraq to a record high of 150,000 to provide security for January’s elections.

It’s too bad the president listened to the “masters of the ship” rather than to the U.S. Constitution and our Founding Fathers. Hearing nothing but suave, soothing counsel he supposed he could obtain his purpose and so set sail. In the process he unleashed upon Americans the greatest Euroclydon since Vietnam.

Perhaps the Body of Christ can learn a lesson here. We, too, live in a day of the soft, south wind. Tolerance and good will, sweetness and light – so the south wind gently blows. Meanwhile, evangelicals join light with darkness, preach concord between Christ and Belial, and gladly sign truces with false doctrine. But just over the horizon lies Euroclydon. And multitudes the world over will pay the price for our folly. What else can we expect when we heed the counsel of men rather than the warnings of God?

If I could say one thing to the president it would not be, “I told you so.” It would be, “The foolishness of God is wiser than the wisdom of men. Hear Him.” Mr. Bush listened to the voice of the people instead of the voice of truth. A mere year after declaring a “dark and painful era” over in Iraq, he is just beginning to experience the Perfect Storm.

December 13, 2004

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com. He is the author of Why I Stopped Listening to Rush and numerous other books.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Introducing the Peniel Gospel Team

Becky Lynn Black  

The other night I looked up at the sky above our Farm.  It was brilliant with stars.  The sharp contrast between the dark of the sky and the light of the stars made me dizzy.  The stars are there during the daytime, but we can’t see them because the sky isn’t dark.  And even in large cities at night, where the lights lighten the sky, it’s often difficult to see the stars.

I thought, “What a beautiful picture of the Peniel Gospel Team!” The spiritual darkness of the country of India, where only 2- claim any relationship with the Savior, makes the brilliance of the Gospel work being done shine all the more brightly!

The coordinating director of this work is a man named Mammen. He describes the ministry of Peniel Gospel Team (PGT):  “We are currently working among twenty people groups of the north east region of India. Now we have over the years, some two hundred churches that the evangelists of Peniel Gospel Team have planted over the last forty years. God has been very gracious towards us and helped us to do all that we are doing in this region. We have been working among those people groups where Christ has been never shared.”

Peniel Gospel Team (PGT) is an association of believers in the far northeast corner of India.  This location is next to the countries of Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh; it is sheltered in the foothills of the great range of Mt. Everest. About 80- of the people in this region are below the poverty line. The believers gather in over 200 local churches.  Many of these churches are in isolated, rural villages that are reached only by small paths winding through the hills.  Many of the churches are meeting in temporary shelters, with congregations of less than 50 families.

The work was started almost 40 years ago when Mammen, as a new believer from the south of India, was impressed by the Lord to travel north with the Gospel.  Like Abraham of old, he left his home and family, travelling to a land that he didn’t know, without financial support or security.  After several years of struggling alone in the work, he returned to south India to get a wife.  “Alice, I would like for you to be my wife, but let me tell you how it will be.  God has appointed me to bring the Gospel to this unreached section of India.  We will be alone.  We will suffer persecution.  We will not have financial security.  Our life will be difficult.  But we will be obedient.  Will you marry me?”   (Now, I wasn’t there when he proposed, but I imagine this is how it was J)   Alice committed herself equally to the task of Gospel Work, and they returned to settle permanently in this place untouched by the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

After many years of hard work and much sacrifice, God began to bless them with individuals seeking peace for their soul.  A person here…a person there….and soon the first church was formed.  As the years have passed, the trials and tribulations have continued….but so has the faithfulness of our Lord!  Today there are 400 indigenous missionaries working with Mammen; they are taking the Gospel message to totally unreached people groups living off the beaten track.

In addition to these 400 evangelists, PGT has established 2 children’s homes.  These homes shelter 110 children, most of whom are orphans.  These children are spared much of the poverty and insecurity that would otherwise be their lot as orphans.

In the rural villages, PGT offers free academic education where there are no government schools, or where the people are too poor to pay school fees. Also, PGT offers vocational training, where adults can learn skills to help them make a living.  In some villages, they have established wells with good, clean water.

Finally, PGT has established a Bible School/Seminary that trains church leaders and evangelists in the deeper things of the Scriptures.

In all these endeavors, there is one focus: to establish groups of believers, strong in following after Christ.

Can you see the full breadth of this work?  Evangelism…rural outreach…orphans…academic education…vocational training…Bible/ministry training…crusades…well drilling.  Wherever God opens a door, they use the opportunity to be a shining star for Him.

“How is all this done?” you might be asking.  Good question.  First, it is done by the grace and blessing of our Lord.  Second, it is done by the faithful, sacrificial work of these wonderful Indian brothers and sisters.  Third, it is done by good financial stewardship of the love gifts sent by American brothers and sister.

It costs about $75/month to support an evangelist with his family.  There are 400 evangelists.

It costs about $35/month to support a child in a children’s home.  There are 110 children.

It costs $4,000 to build a temporary shelter for a congregation, and $8,000 to build a permanent shelter.  Currently 4 congregations are waiting for a temporary shelter, and 3 congregations are waiting for a permanent shelter.

It costs $1600 for a motorcycle that can navigate the trails to the villages in the mountains; it costs $100 for a bicycle to the villages in the lowlands.  Most of the evangelists are still walking to the villages; they are waiting for more efficient transportation.

Add to these items the cost of the Bible School, the free academic schools, the vocational training, administrative expenses……  you get the picture.

Currently 75- of the income needed is coming from outside the country, primarily the USA.  (Twenty-five percent comes from donations of the Indian believers and a private school that generates income.)  As with all 1st-generation mission work, there is heavy reliance upon outside assistance.

But that assistance comes with trouble.  Government sources are naturally interested in any money coming into the country; this requires more government scrutiny of the work.  Evangelist and orphan sponsors from abroad are often unreliable; after the initial surge of emotional commitment, their giving slacks off, leaving the Work scrambling to meet the need for food, clothing, shelter and medical care of those placed in their care.  Fluctuating exchange rates, changing legislation, and banking fees make international movement of money more costly and unpredictable.  The local community surrounding the Work often wonders about the foreign connections of their neighbor; this generates misunderstanding and sometimes hostility.  Lastly, voluntary donations are unpredictable, making financial stewardship in the Work more difficult.

Into this situation God has brought our partnership. 

(Next: Defining our Partnership.)

February 15, 2013

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Introducing Philippians

 David Alan Black  

One of the greatest fallacies about Koine Greek is that it was chosen for the inscripturation of the New Testament because it was somehow superior to the other languages of the day. Nothing could be further from the truth. There is only one reason (humanly speaking) why the New Testament was written in Greek, and that is a man named Alexander the Great.

Alexander was the first universalist of the ancient world. He had been commissioned by God (or so he thought) to unite the world and then infuse it with the culture and language of Greece. His aim, he said, was “to marry East with West.” He dreamed of a universal empire in which there was neither Jew nor Greek, barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free.

We have seen in recent years a similar dream among certain Americans who think that by spreading democratic ideals (by military force if necessary) they could unite East and West. But the truth is that only Christianity can destroy the barriers that divide Greek and Jew, barbarian and Scythian, slave and free. Christianity obliterates these barriers, and many more indeed. For in one and the same Body abide the aristocrat and the ploughman, the cultured and the uncultured, the Jew and the non-Jew, the leader and the follower, the home-schooler and the government-schooler, the Calvinist and the non-Calvinist, the Burji and the Guji. Together we are “holy ones” (hagioi, see Phil. 1:1) – the dedicated people of God. Real Christianity always means genuine community, and it is an amazing community indeed, given all the diversity among us.

It is not too much to say that community was a reality created and introduced by Christianity. From the very beginning the church was a united church (see Acts 2). Together, the followers of Jesus behaved with brotherly love toward those inside the church and with missional love toward those without. Today, in our churches, we must never give the impression of superiority or condescension either toward one another or toward the world around us. As I have written in The Downward Path of Jesus, “nationality, education, and social status mean nothing to Jesus…. In His kingdom there are no small people.” True Christianity has never been a religion of office and title, status and prestige. It is acounterfeit Christianity that allows an atmosphere of class, race, or gender consciousness; the real thing radiates humble equality wherever it goes. Different Christians will have different functions in the Body, of course, but it is the duty of every Christian to serve every other Christian in love and humility.

Let us then work, and work hard, and work together, not to advance ourselves or our denominations or our paltry kingdoms, but to advance Christ’s upside-down kingdom in which there are neither Jews nor Greeks, slaves nor free people, males nor females. The book of Philippians, at its core, is nothing other than an appeal to maintain this kind of unity. But note carefully: it is not unity for unity’s sake. It is (as we shall see) unity in the cause of the Gospel, and this is the great theme we will seek to unpack in this series of essays.

May the result of our studies in Philippians be an advance in the kingdom of a crucified Galilean carpenter who rules the greatest empire the world has ever known. And, as we study, may our supreme focus always be Jesus Christ, the one who unites us, and not the secondary issues that separate us.

January 31, 2009

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Introducing India

Becky Lynn Black  

When you think of India, what comes to your mind?  Poverty?  The British East India Company? Gang rapes? Beautiful red and gold temples? Taj Mahal? Slavery? Curry? Masses of people? Gandhi? Mother Teresa? Elephants? Amy Carmichael or William Carey?

As the Lord has laid the people of India upon our hearts, we’ve discovered many things about this land.

India is the 2nd most populous country in the world.  China has 1.3 billion people; India has 1.2 billion. (Compare this to 315 million in USA, and 85 million in Ethiopia.) 

This means that in India there are 954 people per square mile, compared to 84 people per square mile in USA, and 173 per square mile in Ethiopia.  Of the approximately 200 countries in the world, only 21 have a greater population density than India.

The economy of India is the 3rd largest in the world, after USA and China.  Mass production and a change in political orientation have caused this.  This economic growth has done little for the masses, but has developed a select middle-class and upper-class.  Those who leave India for the USA are coming from the upper-classes, having received advanced education in Europe or the Middle East.

According to the World Bank, 1/4th of India’s people live on less than 60 cents per day, 1/3rd are below the international poverty line of $1.25/day, and 2/3rds are living on less than $2/day. 

This rate of poverty is worse than most of Africa.  In fact, 8 Indian states have more poor people than the 26 poorest African nations combined!

One out of every 3 malnourished children in the world is found in India; almost 60- of Indian children are stunted by malnutrition.  In sub-Sahara Africa, 24- of the children are underweight; in India that rises to a staggering 47-! According to UNICEF, 2.1 million children under the age of 5 die each year because of malnutrition. That’s 4 every minute.

40- of the world’s child marriages (about 4 million/year) take place in India.  Indian girls as young as pre-puberty are often sold into marriage.  This custom is not only in accordance with rural tradition, but it is often economically necessary for the very poor population.

An estimated 25- of girl babies in India are killed by selective abortion or infanticide.  Girls are a financial loss to the family; they represent a dowry that must be paid, and they do not bring economic prosperity to the family. As such they are discarded early.

Human trafficking and enslavement is rampant in India.  By some estimates, child labor is more pronounced in India than in any other place on earth. Child slavery factories make many of the goods sent to the stores in the USA.  Often their work is dangerous, like the production of fireworks, or the using of acid in metal work.  Sometimes they are chained in place for their work in isolated rural areas.  Parents sell their children in order to free themselves from debt; often the whole family is bonded into labor camps indefinitely due to debt.

The caste system of social order was introduced to India with Hinduism.  Since the 1980s the caste system has been a major point in Indian politics.  A mentor of Gandhi wrote to him:

The Out-caste is a by-product of the Caste system. There will be outcastes as long as there are castes. Nothing can emancipate the Out-caste except the destruction of the Caste system. Nothing can help to save Hindus and ensure their survival in the coming struggle except the purging of the Hindu Faith of this odious and vicious dogma.

About 16- of India’s population is of the lowest caste, the “untouchables” that perform the yucky jobs of handling the dead, cleaning human waste, sweeping streets, etc.   These cannot touch, share water sources, eat together, or in any way associate with the other castes, but through affirmative action laws and humanitarian efforts, their literacy and influence upon Indian life has increased dramatically.

The Dalits (“untouchables”) compose about 70- of the church in India.  However, especially in the Catholic/Orthodox church of the south, they have little leadership role.  Even within the historic, established church, the caste system is displayed.

The power of God to save through the Gospel of the Lord Jesus came to the people of India shortly after the resurrection of Christ.  Tradition says that the Apostle Thomas (yes, “Doubting Thomas”) travelled to the southern region of India with the Gospel; the Catholic/Orthodox church of today is the result of this witness. 

Around 1500, colonial powers brought Christianity, mixed with economic ventures.

However, despite hundreds of years of “influence” by European countries, the number of Indians who claim any sort of relationship to the Savior is a measly 2-!

Persecution against Indian Christians comes in the form of murders, economic discrimination and burnings. During 2012, there were 135 reports of violent persecutions; many other situations were not reported due to fear of reprisals.  The growing hostility of Hindu nationalists is of particular concern.

(Next essay: “Looking at Hinduism.”)

February 3, 2013

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Introducing Bradford Hall and Maple Ridge

 David Alan Black 

Greetings in the name of our wonderful Savior!

Allow us to introduce ourselves. We are Dave and Becky Black. We live on a secluded 123-acre working farm in southern Virginia called Rosewood. God has blessed us with two homes that we seek to use for His glory. After all, they belong to Him!

Bradford Hall is our personal residence. We built it to resemble a quaint 1820s farm house. Here we accommodate guests who desire a place of rest and refuge, a place to focus intently upon God, a place of solitude and prayer. Over the years, Bradford Hall has hosted hundreds of people – students, married couples, singles, church leaders, and furloughing missionaries.

In addition to Bradford Hall, which is designed for short-term retreats, we also have Maple Ridge. Originally build in 1810, Maple Ridge has been completely renovated and is equipped with such modern amenities as air conditioning and a complete kitchen. We designed Maple Ridge to accommodate larger families on retreat or needing temporary housing. They can stay at Maple Ridge from a few days up to 6 months. These families are sometimes in a period of transition or adjustment. We especially want to minister to families who have been wounded in so-called “fulltime Christian ministry.” Maple Ridge is a safe shelter in which to put body and soul back together and to seek guidance from the Lord for the next step.

If you would like to talk to us about staying at either Bradford Hall or Maple Ridge, please free to contact us at dblack@sebts.edu. In the meantime, our prayer is that the peace of God, which exceeds anything we can understand, will guard your hearts and minds as you live in union with Christ Jesus. May His Spirit serve as a compass for your souls, leading you in the direction God intends for your lives.

In the precious Lamb,

Dave and Becky Black

August 6, 2013

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

The Intolerance Hall of Fame

Pieter Friedrich

Christianity is a religion of faith (Heb. 11), but it is also a religion of intolerance. Meet some of the most intolerant characters of Scripture:

God the Father. God drove Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden because they disobeyed Him (Gen. 3). God sent a world-wide flood as a judgment for Man’s sins and, with the exception of Noah, He destroyed “every living substance…which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven.” (Gen. 7). Also, God “rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire” for their depravity and homosexuality (Gen. 19).

The Law-Giver Moses. Moses refused to tolerate the Egyptian Pharaoh’s enslavement of the Israelites, and, at God’s behest, told his brother Aaron to stretch out his hand and call ten plagues upon the land of Egypt (Exod. 7-12). Also, Moses burned the golden calf which the idolatrous Israelites had created, and sent the Levites to slay all those who refused to side with the Lord (Exod. 32). Also, Moses declared the judgment of God upon the Israelites for their complaining (Num. 14:26-38)

Gideon the Judge. Gideon took ten of his servants, cast down the altar of Baal, cut down the wooden image that was beside it and offered a sacrifice to God on an altar which he built (Jud. 6:27-28). Gideon also drove the Midianites out of Israel, pursued them, and slew “two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb.” (Jud. 7)

The Prophet Samuel. Samuel condemned Saul for not waiting for him before offering sacrifices to God (I Sam. 13:8-15). He also refused to tolerate Saul’s rebellion to God when Saul disobeyed God’s order to utterly destroy the Amalekites, and told Saul that “to obey is better than sacrifice.” (I Sam. 15). Also, Samuel condemned King Saul for seeking the advice of the Witch of Endor, and declared God’s judgment on Israel for Saul’s disobedience to God (I Sam. 28).

The Prophet Elijah. Elijah declared a drought in Israel as God’s judgment for King Ahab’s idolatry (I Kings 18:17-40). He also refused to tolerate Israel’s rejection of God, and slew the false prophets of Baal (I Kings 18:17-40).

The Prophet Isaiah. Isaiah condemned Israel and Judah for their rebellion and idolatry against God (Isa. 57), and he declared God’s curse upon Israel (Isa. 6).

The Prophet Jeremiah. Jeremiah declared God’s judgment on Israel for her theft, murder, adultery, and idolatry (Jer. 7:9). Also, he declared God’s curse, that God would “fight against you [Israel] with an outstretched hand and with a strong arm, even in anger, and in fury, and in great wrath.” (Jer. 21:5)

The Prophet Daniel. Daniel declared God’s judgment on Belshazzar and his kingdom for the idolatry and blasphemy of the Babylonians (Daniel 5:13-31).

John the Baptist. John preached to the Jews, saying, “O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” He refused to tolerate Jews who did not bring forth fruits, but rather rested on their descent from Abraham (Luke 3:7-9). Also, John refused to tolerate King Herod’s marriage to his brother’s wife (Mark 6:18)

God the Son. Jesus cleansed the temple and “cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves.” (Matt. 21:12-13 Also, Jesus refused to tolerate those who might attempt to find redemption through any religion but Christianity, saying, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6).

God the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was lied to by Ananias and Sapphira, who cheated the church. The Holy Spirit then judged Ananias and his wife and caused them to fall and die (I Kings 18:17-40)

The Apostle Paul. Paul refused to tolerate immorality in the church and went so far as to say that, “if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.” (I Cor. 5) Also, Paul refused to tolerate women teachers, and said, “I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” (I Tim. 2:12)

Israel was judged repeatedly. The pagan tribes and nations were judged repeatedly. Countries, cities, and individuals were judged.

God, however, is only intolerant of disobedience. And Jesus Christ died on the cross and was resurrected on the third day so that His blood might cover our inability to keep the Law.

There is hope. God will tolerate those who come before Him through Christ Jesus, and the Holy Spirit will grant unto the same the ability to keep the Law.

I Pet. 5:6-11 reads: “Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you. Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world. But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you. To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”

July 6, 2004

Pieter Friedrich lives in a small town in the California Sierra Foothills. He is an amateur political analyst, a writer, a classical liberal, a juris naturalist, a paleo-conservative, a strict constitutionalist, and, foremost, a Christian. He may be reached for comment here.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Interview with Thomas Hudgins about Our New Greek Portal

 David Alan Black 

My assistant, Thomas Hudgins, has been revising ourGreek Portal. Earlier today I posed several questions to him. Here are his answers:

1. Thomas, what is the motivation behind the new Greek Portal?

Dr. Black, first let me thank you for the opportunity to answer these questions about the updated Greek Portal. It is a huge blessing in my life to co-labor with you for the gospel. I’m always challenged by your teaching and example in my life and always give thanks to the Lord for the investment you and your wife are making in my life.

So, what is the motivation behind the new Greek Portal? The one, single, única motivation? The motivation really is simple—the Great Commission. Apart from the Great Commission there is no reason to compile all the information on this site. Jesus commands all of his followers to make disciples of all the nations, teaching them to observe all that he commanded (Matt. 28:19-). Until the Lord returns, we as believers have the amazing opportunity and responsibility to carry out this mission. No mission has as much eternal significance as this one. These are our marching orders. Whatever the motivations are for the Greek Portal, if they do not fall under the overall goals of honoring the Lord Jesus Christ and fulfilling the Great Commission, then the work is just not worth the effort.

However, we obviously believe that the new Greek Portal is worth the effort, that it will honor the Lord Jesus Christ (both in the way it is developed as well as the final product), and that it will help us fulfill the Great Commission. How? We want to provide a resource page that will hyperlink others to the plethora of tools available via the web for studying, teaching, and learning Koine Greek and the New Testament. The new Greek Portal is not going to exegete a passage for anyone. There are no links to download Metzger’s vocabulary from one’s CPU to one’s brain. There are no shortcuts from content to knowledge per se. But we want to provide a central location for all teachers and students of God’s Word (and I’m not referring only to seminary students!) where they can come and find the best tools the Internet has to offer for New Testament Greek. And believe me, there are a lot out there!

2. What can Greek students expect to see when the Greek Portal goes live on January 1, 2013?

First, the Greek Portal will never be “completed.” We need to keep updating and revising the Portal as long as it is up. But what can Greek students expect to see when it goes live?

First, we hope the Portal is going to be easy-on-the-eyes. Aesthetically, we hope that Greek students are going to “enjoy” using the Portal for how it looks. I’m sure everyone has been to a website and found it painful to navigate just because of the aesthetics. Maybe the lettering was too small, or too big. Maybe the font was some new techie-font or cursive. We are definitely trying to make this user-friendly. While how it looks is not as important as the content found on the site, it is still important and something we are taking into serious consideration.

When you arrive at the Portal, you’ll be greeted by a “Welcome.” On the left side of the page, you will find an alphabetized list of different topics/subjects. Once you find the subject you are looking for (or maybe one you didn’t know you were looking for!), you can click on that link and see all of the resources dealing with it. There is going to be some overlap. Due to the structure of the site and the range of information involved, some resources have to be housed under more than one subject heading. When this happens, we are trying to customize the description/link for that given heading so that it assists the reader as much as possible. On the right side of the Portal, you will see the covers of books written and edited by Dr. Black, with links on where they can be purchased.

We are thinking about a number of factors for the Portal, one of which is the audience of Dave Black Online (both present and future). The Greek Portal is being designed to complement and  supplement what is found over there and to appeal to the same audience. This includes teachers of New Testament Greek, students throughout the U.S. and abroad, homeschooling parents, etc. We want this page to be a blessing to all of them.

3. How will this Greek site differ from other sites currently online?

This new Greek Portal is not designed to “beat” all the rest. There is really no room for competition in the kingdom of God. We have but one goal (see the answer to #1 above). There are a lot of solid sites on the Web. We hope and pray that our Greek Portal will be:

(1)  User-friendly. No one needs a degree in Astrophysics in order to navigate the site.

(2)  User-sensitive. The Greek Portal has a broad audience. We want it to contain the resources that advanced New Testament Greek students will benefit from, but we also want beginning Greek students to find those resources that are going to reach them.

(3)  Regularly updated. Many sites currently online do not get updated as often as possible. Sometimes this lessens the sites’ value to its viewers. For example, when hyperlinks change or fail it is frustrating to the user. We want this one to maintain its quality as well as to continually increase its content.

4. How can readers of DBO help you as you complete the project?

Before I specifically answer this question, let me add one more thing. Raymond Culpepper, in his book The Great Commission, points out that “in just one generation, history moved from a ‘Gutenberg world’ to a ‘Google world’” (160). Perhaps that’s going a little too far. We certainly have not ceased from using the codex in today’s world. But we have added a whole new type of “press” to our world, a digital machine that people are using to turn out resource after resource. The Greek Portal is important because it’s a simple navigation tool for all of these resources. Especially think about the number of people who speak English as a second language (see my posthere) and who do not have an opportunity to study New Testament Greek at a school likeSoutheastern Baptist Theological Seminary. We hope that the New Testament Greek Portal will be a huge blessing to them.

Ministry is always designed to be shared. One-man-shows simply are not supposed to happen when it comes to the work of the gospel. That’s the way the Greek Portal is as well. You, the reader and user, get to play a role in the content that appears on it. Let me throw out a few different ways in which you can get involved with the project. Believe me when I say that I hope you will help us, and we need you to do so.

1. Do you know of a single subject or a single resource that needs to be on the Greek Portal? An example of a subject is something like “LXX (or Septuagint).” An example of a resource on the web might bewww.septuagint.org. If you know of one of these, email it to us atdblack@sebts.edu.
2. Do you blog or have a website where you can develop resources and make them available online? If you do, let us know (dblack@sebts.edu.) so that we can keep the Greek Portal community informed and updated.
3. Do you know how to build apps? We really want to make some apps available for the Greek Portal viewers. I’m not sure what sort of apps, so this area is wide-open. Be creative!
4. Do you want to take a subject or two and scour the cyberworld for all the resources available? This would be a huge help. All you’d have to do is compile the information in a Word doc, include the hyperlinks, and email the document to us.
5. In this list, number 5 is most important. It might sound silly to pray for a project like this, but it’s not. We want to be devoting ourselves to prayer with this project (Acts 1:14; Rom. 12:12). And even though we are not experiencing any affliction in this project like Paul when he wrote 2 Corinthians, we do want to echo his words that you can be “joining in helping us through your prayers, so that thanks may be given by many persons” (2 Cor. 1:11).

November 30, 2012

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline

   restoring our biblical and constitutional foundations

Interview with Maurice Robinson (Part 2)

 David Alan Black 

I recently asked the students in my textual criticism class to write out some questions they wanted to ask Dr. Maurice Robinson, my colleague at Southeastern Seminary, having already read his Case for Byzantine Priority. Dr. Robinson graciously agreed to answer them. I publish his written response, verbatim, in two parts. Here is Part 2. (To read Part 1, click here.)

7. How does your approach differ from eclecticism (of any kind – radical, reasoned, Sturzian)?

“Sturzian” must be a textual variant of some sort. By way of definition, radical or rigorous eclecticism is based almost exclusively on internal evidence, while reasoned eclecticism is based on varying combinations of external and internal evidence.

Other theories are primarily externally based. These include the preference for a favorite ms (Tischendorf), small group of mss (Westcott-Hort), or a particular texttype (Amphoux/Heimerdinger for the Western; Robinson-Pierpont for the Byzantine). The Sturzian view also is primarily external, but follows the reading found in a majority of geographically diverse texttypes.

The simplest answer has been noted above. Eclecticism (any type) treats the text piecemeal, on a variant-by-variant basis. Byzantine-priority does not function on a variant-by-variant basis, but considers the entirety of the text as primary. Only after the text is established on the wider scale are the competing internal claims evaluated within the sequential variant units. In no case does Byzantine-priority adopt as primary a reading that lacks significant support. This principle clearly distinguishes Byzantine-priority from all forms of eclectic methodology. Internal criteria are utilized to confirm text-critically those readings established by external criteria and to demonstrate the secondary nature of the various competing alternatives.

The Byzantine Textform has been criticized because its specific pattern of readings is not found among surviving pre-fourth century textual witnesses. Yet the text produced by the various forms of modern eclecticism creates a sequence of claimed “original” readings whose pattern cannot be demonstrated ever to have existed within transmissional history. The Byzantine Textform, on the other hand, does in its aggregate reflect a legitimate and historically valid form of text that at any point retains a basic consensus of support among its related witnesses. Even where the Byzantine mss are divided, a transmissional consistency permeates a substantial portion of Byzantine witnesses. The Byzantine Textform thus  differs significantly from the results produced by various eclectic schools.

8. How would you defend your view that we now have the New Testament in the original Greek against the agnostic position that we cannot get back to the original?

I dealt with this issue in my ETS 2005 paper, “The Integrity of the Early New Testament Text: A Collation-based Comparison”. In general, any claim that suggests absence of the physical autograph equals absence of textual reliability or biblical authority is bogus. The manuscript copies we possess remain substantially identical to the autographs. As demonstrated in my paper, the earliest extant (non-Byzantine) papyri compared against the text of Byzantine minuscule mss copied a thousand years later share a verbal identity approximating 92- —  including orthographic and non-translatable differences. With such a large percentage of common text, even over more than a millennium of transmission, it is clear that the autograph text substantially has been preserved, even among disparate copies representing quite different textual traditions. On the same principle, dispute hardly should arise as to whether the autograph text similarly was preserved during the much shorter period between autograph composition and the earliest extant mss. Transmissional observations suggest an equally reliable transmissional history during the short period from which no evidence exists. In addition, all doctrinal essentials are clearly present within the ca. 92- average base text; no doctrine is established or negated within the remaining ca. 8- where differences occur. Also, most variants are quite minor and generally stylistic in nature. If the orthographic, non-translatable, and minor stylistic variants are excluded, the overall agreement among the earliest and latest mss rises substantially. The existing documents accurately represent the autographs in all essential points. The text we now possess is sufficient and substantial for establishing and maintaining all doctrinal positions held within orthodox Christianity, skeptics and postmodernists such as Ehrman, Epp, Parker, or the media to the contrary.

9. What is the leading argument in your mind for the inferiority of the Alexandrian text type?

“Reasoned transmissionalism”! Had any texttype other than the Byzantine more closely represented the autograph form of the text in any nt book, that texttype should have thoroughly permeated the primary Greek-speaking region of the Empire beyond the first few centuries. Any later-developing “new” texttype would fail to dominate against a presumed liturgically entrenched and widely disseminated “original” Textform. One need only consider in this regard the failure of the “Western” text to gain a substantial hold within the Greek ms tradition; similarly, one can consider the limited and apparently “localized” nature of the Alexandrian texttype. 

Westcott and Hort acknowledged that the Byzantine Textform dominated the Greek-speaking Eastern Empire from the mid-4th century onward. They also noted that such dominance could have occurred only in two ways: either (1) the Byzantine Textform was the product of a formal, ecclesiastically sanctioned revision, promulgated with full ecclesiastical authority behind it (the Alands’ “Byzantine Imperial Text”); or (2) the Byzantine Textform reflects the autograph form of the text, which — under a normal process of transmission — would be expected to produce an overwhelming number of descendants “at each stage of transmission” (W-H, Introduction, 45). W‑H argued the first alternative, without which their preferred B-Í type of text could not be maintained.

The W-H “revision” hypothesis generally has been discarded, due to lack of historical corroborating evidence. A “process” view is now instituted in its place, suggesting that, over a lengthy period of time, the Byzantine Textform slowly evolved into what finally becomes a relatively fixed form during the post-ninth century minuscule era. But, as Zane Hodges long ago pointed out:

“No one has yet explained how a long, slow process spread out over many centuries as well as over a wide geographical area, and involving a multitude of copyists, who often knew nothing of the state of the text outside of their own monasteries or scriptoria, could achieve this widespread uniformity out of the diversity presented by the earlier forms of text. Even an official edition of the New Testament — promoted with ecclesiastical sanction throughout the known world — would have had great difficulty achieving this result as the history of Jerome’s Vulgate amply demonstrates. But an unguided process achieving relative stability and uniformity in the diversified textual, historical, and cultural circumstances in which the New Testament was copied, imposes impossible strains on our imagination” (Hodges, Appendix C, in Wilbur N. Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text, 166).

Other claims, such as the influence of Chrysostom, the Constantinopolitan Church, or the supposed destruction of Alexandrian mss due to the Islamic conquest, are discussed in my full-length essay, “The Case for Byzantine Priority”, available on the internet and as an appendix to the R-P Byzantine Greek nt. I might observe that, if the Alexandrian text could have been wiped out by the Islamic conquest, that predominantly Egyptian text was not widespread, but reflected only a more localized tradition; also, for either Chrysostom or Constantinople to effect such a significant change in the Church’s base text, full ecclesiastical authority and proclamation would have been necessary in order to accomplish its general acceptance throughout the Eastern Empire. No such proclamation or imposition of ecclesiastical authority seems ever to have occurred. The implication returns to Byzantine originality as the more probable cause of that Textform’s dominance within the transmissional history of the nt.

To return to the original question, I do not reject the Alexandrian texttype primarily on the basis of subjective judgments regarding a presumed inferior quality of its readings; nor do I approve the Byzantine Textform because of a supposed superior quality regarding its readings. Textual establishment is primarily a matter of evaluating the external evidence in order to determine on the basis of transmissional considerations whatever sequentially connected set of readings appears most likely to have been original. Hort correctly stated the leading principles in this regard: “Knowledge of documents should precede final judgment upon readings” (W-H, Introduction 30), and “All trustworthy restoration of corrupted texts is founded on the study of their history” (Ibid., 40; small caps original in both cases).

10. Do you allow any possibility that the Byzantine text preserved the wrong reading?

Michael Holmes asked that question during our 2000 on-campus text-critical conference. My answer was definite: NO — at least in regard to the 99- bulk of the Byzantine Textform where significant division does not appear among its mss. This again distinguishes our position from any form of “Byzantine eclecticism”. Had we treated the variant units merely on a case-by-case basis without following our principles consistently, the level of external support would fluctuate, and necessarily would produce a text that was no longer “authentically Byzantine”. As my text-critical mentor, Kenneth W. Clark, long ago suggested, on transmissional grounds, it is more likely that the original text is preserved in a single texttype, rather than “original readings” having been scattered among diverse textual witnesses that reflect widely divergent streams of transmission. Many good reasons can be cited in support of Clark’s view, one of which is the lack of support within eclectic editions for the pattern of readings claimed to be “original” (cf. my forthcoming essay regarding 105 whole verses of na27/ubs4 which, when tabulated as whole‑verse units, lack support from any ms, version, or father within transmissional history).

Modern eclecticism presupposes a highly skewed transmission of the text, sarcastically described by Calvin Porter: “Very early the original text was rent piecemeal and so carried to the ends of the earth where the textual critic, like lamenting Isis, must seek it by his skill” (Calvin L. Porter, “A Textual Analysis of the Earliest Manuscripts of the Gospel of John”, PhD Diss., Duke University, 1961, 12). In contrast, a relatively “normal” process of transmission maintains the greater likelihood of autograph preservation within a single dominant branch of the transmissional tradition, absent any evidence demonstrating a major upheaval in the transmissional process. This argument particularly is cogent when transmissional dominance is accompanied by a high level of internal plausibility for the readings that appear within that dominant Textform.

11. What is your viewpoint on the reliability of the KJV/NKJV versions?

Text-critically, the KJV and NKJV are translated from a text commonly termed TR (Textus Receptus, or Received Text), with a smattering of readings from the Latin Vulgate, various retranslations from Latin sources, or editorial conjectures. All other nt translations tend to reflect a general Alexandrian type of text. In both cases, I have reservations, since neither agrees totally with the Byzantine tradition.

Yet the NKJV includes footnotes regarding significant variant readings, and clearly indicates whether a variant reading is found in the Nestle-ubs predominantly Alexandrian tradition (“NU-text”) or the Byzantine tradition (the “M-text”, being the Hodges-Farstad “majority” text). Footnotes in most English translations lack texttype-specific identification, leaving their readers in the dark regarding the textual nature of any variant. In this sense, there is a real benefit in the NKJV footnotes, unmatched in any other English translation. I would prefer to see a good, formal-equivalence English translation based on the Byzantine Textform, with footnotes indicating translatable variants from the alternative traditions.

Should one inquire about the translational quality of the KJV or NKJV, that is a separate matter. I strongly prefer formal equivalence; the KJV and NKJV qualify in that regard. However, I do not use the KJV for teaching or study purposes due to its archaic language and an inconsistency in rendering Greek words and phrases, particularly in parallel passages. The NKJV is superior in this regard, but remains inconsistent in rendering some words and phrases. Both translations are generally accurate and reliable: they will not mislead a reader in doctrinal matters. Other modern formal equivalence translations (ESV, NASV) are superior in translational quality, and would be strongly recommended had they been based on a Byzantine text or had they identified a sufficient number of Byzantine variants in their footnotes.

12. What are five books you would suggest to help a student in textual criticism?

An easier question.

(1) One should have a good critical apparatus edition, such as the latest Nestle-Aland 27th edition. That volume contains more variants and supporting evidence than UBS or other inexpensive commonly available editions. However, even in na27 not all significant variants are cited, particularly those specifically of the Byzantine tradition.

(2) One should be familiar with Metzger’s Text of the New Testament (3rd edition or earlier — Ehrman’s 4th edition revision contains several factual errors).

(3) The Alands’ book of the same title provides additional information regarding the history, materials, and methodological essentials of the discipline.

For information regarding current trends, the following co-authored volumes:

(4) Epp/Fee, Studies in the Theory and Method of New Testament Textual Criticism; and

(5) Ehrman/Holmes, The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research.

None of these works has much to say in favor of the Byzantine Textform, and what they do say is often a distortion or caricature. Nevertheless, they do represent contemporary text-critical thought within various eclectic frameworks.

To counter this trend, I recommend (6) the R-P edition of the Byzantine Textform — particularly its Preface and Appendix (“The Case for Byzantine Priority”) — as well as a number of other books and articles by myself, Hodges, Pickering, and others.

Once one has acquainted himself with contemporary thought, an examination of the major text-critical works of the 19th century is recommended (Scrivener, Burgon, Miller, and the W-H Introduction itself) — but that is beyond the scope of this question. 

13. What advice do you have for novice textual critics?

Study Greek and read the Greek nt until it becomes second-nature. Be familiar with the types of error that could occur during the transmissional process. Collate the various sample pages displayed in the handbooks; begin with the papyri and uncials, and then move on to the minuscule samples (Greenlee gives instruction regarding how to collate). Try to determine how a variant reading may have arisen, whether by accident or deliberate alteration. Consider all readings on the bases of external support, transmissional probability, transcriptional probability, intrinsic probability, and any other factors that might apply within a given context. Seek no authoritative outside opinion until you have attempted to comprehend the variants for yourself. Only then, examine what others have said concerning a given variant unit. Follow the same method, and examine sequentially all variant readings within randomly selected chapters of the Nestle-Aland edition (gospel variants will be most instructive). Any lesser approach to text-critical study opens the door to bias or undue outside influence, either of which could stifle the opportunity truly to engage in the discipline as an independent scholar.

April 14, 2006

Read Part 1.

David Alan Black is the editor of www.daveblackonline.com.

Back to daveblackonline