“New Testament Text and Translation Commentary” by Philip Comfort

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Author: Philip W. Comfort
Format: Hardcover
Page Count: 899
Publisher: Tyndale House
Publication Date: 2008
ISBN: 9781414310343
Rating: 5 of 5 stars

I have always been intrigued by textual criticism and the study of how we got our Bible. The Bibles we have today are the descendants of hand written manuscripts, written on papyri, vellum or paper, and in either large (uncial) or small (miniscule) letters. Those manuscripts were written originally in Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic, and later translated into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and other languages. Today we have English Bibles finely produced from the magic of printing presses and publishing houses. But how can we know that these Bibles accurately represent what was originally written? This is where textual criticism comes in — a highly disputed field, especially in today’s skeptical age. Textual scholars referred to as critics, take the time to compare all the hand written manuscripts that have been preserved down to our day. Using various methods of comparing, contrasting and evaluating the readings of numerous manuscripts (over 5700 for the NT!), they help guide today’s church in deciding which textual variants are the likely original readings.

Philip Comfort is one of these scholars, and he has provided a fabulous resource for Bible scholars, pastors, and others to study the textual data on all the 3,000 or so places in the New Testament where we find textual variants that may affect the Bible translations we have in our hands. Comfort focuses primarily on the variants which result in differences between the various English Bible versions in use today (KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, HCSB, NLT, TNIV, NRSV, etc.). He also highlights some of the intriguing variants and places where the Western family of manuscripts often expands the text. What makes Comfort’s work so especially valuable is that his discussion is all in English! He discusses the Greek and other languages, but is mindful of the non-technical, English speaking reader. This makes New Testament Text and Translation Commentary (NTTTC) very accessible, opening up the intricacies of textual critical studies to the average Bible student.

While Comfort may not include all the textual data accessible to scholars in the UBS4 or NA27 Greek texts and other scholarly resources, he does format his work and provide relevant information in a much more user-friendly format. In places where there are two or more variants that have affected the English Bibles, Comfort will first give each variant reading in Greek and English, then he lists the Greek manuscripts and other supports for each variant, and he also adds which English Bibles follow that variant in their text or margin. Following all of this, he offers a brief discussion of that particular variant, taking us step by step through how a conservative, evangelical scholar will assess this textual evidence to arrive at a conclusion concerning this particular reading.

This detailed analysis of each major variant in the Greek New Testament makes up the bulk of the book and provides an easy to look up reference for practically any passage where one might encounter a variant. Comfort also provides a brief overview of textual criticism and a very interesting assessment of the major textual witnesses for each section of the New Testament. He displays an extensive understanding of the papyri manuscripts in particular as well as the history of textual criticism and all the relevant data. A few appendices are also included for more specialized discussions.

NTTTC doesn’t stick to strictly textual critical matters. In Mk. 7:3 a discussion of manners and customs of Bible times is required to understand the Greek phrase “wash their hands with a fist” . Exegetical matters are also addressed, such as in the conservative and delicate handling of the variant at 1 Cor. 14:34-35. NTTTC’s format makes difficult and highly technical discussions much easier. When discussing the ending of Mark, he helpfully lays out all 5 variations of the ending providing a few pages of discussion. At Acts 20:28 he discusses two variants together, by first delineating all the various combinations of the two variants, and helpfully summarizing the options and discussing each option in light of exegetical matters as well.

The discussions in NTTTC prove enlightening. One learns the importance of understanding the patterns of particular scribes when discussing variants such as Luke 24:3 where Comfort explains why Westcott and Hort were wrong. The major passages like the ending of Mark and John 7:53-8:11 are covered in depth. Comfort is honest about some variants being driven by theological considerations, such as in Heb. 2:9. Interestingly, the theological bias in textual variants was almost always rejected by the church in days of old as well as today.

One excerpt of this work will serve to illustrate its value well. Regarding Jude 4, Comfort states:

The reading in TR, poorly attested, is probably an attempt to avoid calling Jesus δεσποτην (“Master” ), when this title is usually ascribed to God (Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; Rev. 6:10). Hence, θεον (“God” ) was appended to δεσποτην. However, 2 Pet. 2:1, a parallel passage, identifies the redeemer, Jesus Christ, as the δεσποτην. So here also the WH NU reading, which is extremely well documented, shows that Jude considered Jesus to be the absolute sovereign.

As one well attuned to the issues relating to King James Onlyism, I found this volume especially helpful. 26 times I found a KJV reading to be supported by no Greek manuscripts. Western additions such as “full of the Holy Spirit” at Acts 15:32 and “Jesus” at Acts 17:31 reveal that “omissions” are in the eye of the beholder. Does the TR omit these important phrases or the Western texts add them? It was through my KJV Onlyism debate lenses that I discovered a few minor errors in Comfort’s text. He wrongly claims the KJV followed Stephanus’ 1550 TR (along with the WH/ NU modern Greek Text) at Rev. 16:5 when in fact they followed Beza’s conjectural emendation “and shall be” instead of “holy one” . He also seems to state that a variant at Rom. 7:6 was introduced by Elzevirs’ TR and then later adopted by the KJV, however the KJV was translated 22 years prior to the Elzevirs’ work. The reading in question was introduced by Beza in one of his editions used by the KJV translators. Also at Luke 2:38 he lists the Vulgate as the sole support for the KJV reading, but Robinson-Pierpont’s Majority Text edition includes the KJV reading “Lord” .

I would have liked Comfort to address more passages relevant to the KJV Only debate. It would have been great if he had mentioned which variants the printed Greek Majority Text’s of Hodges-Farstad or Robinson-Pierpont adopted as well. But space constraints are totally understandable. I also wish he had somehow indicated if the manuscript listings given for a particular passage are complete or not. If more evidence is available (or not) for a given variant, it would be nice to know. Perhaps using an asterisk when all the known witnesses to a variant were listed would help.

All in all, I can’t recommend Comfort’s work more highly. This is an important volume and I will be referring to it often in years to come.

Disclaimer: this book was provided by the publisher for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to provide a positive review.

This book is available for purchase at the following sites: Amazon.com or direct from Tyndale House.

“Keoni’s Big Question” by Patti Ogden

~ Bob Hayton

Authors: Patti B. Ogden, illustrated by Mary Manning
Format: Hardcover
Page Count: 32
Publisher: Capstone Productions
Publication Date: 2008
ISBN: 9780981678368
Rating: 2 of 5 stars

As the father of four young girls, I have to pay attention to kid’s books. As a Christian, I look for good Christian literature that is age-appropriate for my children to read.

Keoni’s Big Question (by Patti B. Ogden, and illustrated by Mary Manning) is a large, colorful, and very attractive book. It has an old fisherman, a boat, fish and animals, a young boy, family, church and home pictures, it is sure to grab the attention of many a young inquiring mind. The story contained in the book is good as well.

A young boy wants to know if anyone can see God. He is frequently let down when various adults evade his question. Along the way he has an adventure with his friend the old fisherman. The fisherman finally answers his question and Keoni begins to understand what it is to know God.

Such a story provides ample opportunities for Christian parents to ask (and answer) questions of their children about spiritual matters. Children will certainly identify with the boy and his quest to get a “straight answer” from adults. They too have wondered why we can’t see God physically.

I would guess this book to be appropriate for children from ages 3 through 12, and it really is produced well. The only drawback of the book comes on the last page. There we discover that this book and others were “inspired and written using stories excerpts and actual sentences from the sermons of William Branham”. Who we are later told “received revelation and visions from the Lord Jesus Christ of what actually happened down throughout Bible history.” Branham’s personal stories are told, they believe, “to inspire spiritual growth so that we would personally know the character and loveliness of our savior”.

I can agree with that last line. That purpose and aim is worthy. But setting Mr. Branham up on a pedestal as if he is uniquely inspired by God is troubling to me. I don’t know much about Branham or his teachings, but such undue admiration for and devotion to one man should be cause for strong caution and concern. Because of this unqualified promotion of a man, and implied belief in extrabiblical revelation of “what actually happened” in Biblical history, I cannot unreservedly give my recommendation to this book. It gets only 2 out of 5 stars from me.

All in all, its a great book for kids. The theology and message of the book is not at all troubling. I was quite surprised when I read the above sentiments on the last page. Parents can discerningly take advantage of this book, but they would need to be careful not to blindly follow the teachings of Brother Branham however, and use the book with caution.

Disclaimer: this book was provided by the publisher for review. The reviewer was under no obligation to provide a positive review.

You can still pick up a copy of this book at Amazon.com.

Minnesota Religious Bloggers

~ fundyreformed ~ 4 Comments

Desiring God’s blog, with 21,000+ subscribers may be the most popular Minnesota religious blog. Tony Jones’ emergent blog is showcased on belief.net. But in an article on Minnesota religious blogging published today at MinnPost.com, it is yours truly who heads the list of Minnesota religious bloggers!

Since blogging is inherently narcissistic, I guess no one is surprised that I’m tooting my own horn right now! 😉

Seriously, the article is an interesting read, and MinnPost.com looks like an interesting mix between online journalism, blogging and a traditional newspaper format. A couple of my local blogging buddies also make honorable mention: Jamsco at The Responsible Puppet, and Shaun at Bible Geek Gone Wild.

The article does bring up a good point. Talking about faith has been enhanced through the online media. Many who are in oppressive religious groups or who are just hesitant to make their questioning or religious seeking known, find the internet very helpful in evaluating their religious beliefs. The world wide web both equips and propels one to find out what they believe and why. The one thing you can count on with respect to the web is that your opinion will be challenged — from all sides. Personally, I think that is a good thing, as Biblical Christianity can stand on its own two feet, and a well-grounded faith is a strong faith.

So all my loyal blog readers will have to go over and read the article. Be sure to leave a comment too, and say how awesome my blog is!

Legalism Versus Grace

~ fundyreformed ~ 4 Comments

I stumbled across a great blog post that relates with the theme of our last several posts: the Gospel’s work in believers. The post actually was first an article for Discipleship Journal. Let me quote a relevant portion of it here, but encourage you all to go over and read the whole thing. It’s also available as a .pdf scan from the magazine here.

Legalism is the opposite of living by grace. It is the belief that one can be justified (attain right standing with God) by following his rules. Paul addressed the error of this belief throughout the book of Galatians, explaining that it’s impossible to be right with God by obeying the law. We need grace.

Most evangelical Christians today know enough to avoid the most basic form of this error. We understand that our entrance into life in Christ””salvation””comes through faith in Christ alone, and not by keeping God’s law. Yet even when our theology of salvation is thoroughly grace-based, we can still fall into legalism. Colossians 2:6-7 says as we have received Christ we should also walk in Him, rooted and grounded in faith. That is, the way we walk in Christ should be consistent with the way we received him.

Many times, though, we fail to extend our understanding of grace and faith past the foundation of receiving Christ, to the daily matters of following him. Instead we begin to think that we stay right with God by keeping his rules. That’s what the Galatians were doing. After entering a relationship with God through grace, they thought they also needed to obey Jewish laws. Paul’s instruction to them””and all believers””is clear: just as we receive salvation by faith and grace, not by following rules, we also walk in Christ by faith and grace, not by keeping a list of commands.

Explore my other posts on gospel-centered living, and the dangers of legalism.

A Gospel-Centered Response to Blog Attacks in Bandit Country

~ fundyreformed ~ 3 Comments

Carl Trueman has a great post on dealing with web critics or blog attacking bandits. I thought his advice was spot on, and his example of a Gospel-centered response to criticism quite helpful. I took the liberty of quoting Carl at some length, but I encourage you to read the full article.

This raises the question of whether one should respond to individual blog attacks. My advice is no, never, not under any circumstances. Now, one of the reasons I do not read these things (in addition to having a real life with real friends, real problems etc) is because I know that, if I did so, there would be times when the temptation to respond would be overwhelming, and that would be fatal. As soon as one responds, the attacker grows parasitically stronger, gaining an audience and a credibility previously denied him. And the victim has lost because he has taken the rant of some nutjob seriously enough to acknowledge it; he has granted it a status which it simply does not merit in and of itself; and in his efforts to refute it, he has perversely made it important, given it a constituency it did not possess. Look, to repeat: the web is bandit country. Let the wild and the whacky compete with the sane and the measured, the incoherent and rambling with the logical and well-argued, the extreme with the moderate. If people believe you are really a lizard from the Planet Iguanadon who has assumed human form and infiltrated a church or a seminary to make it the base for an Iguanaman takeover of the entire Christian church, then let them do so. Nothing you can say to the contrary will do anything other than convince them of the depth and sophistication of the extraterrestrial reptilian conspiracy. Their emotional and psychological needs are clearly more serious than your own; and if you respond to such nonsense, you give it credibility and allow the parasitic nature of the attack to succeed. Ignore it and it may not go away, but sane people will see it for what it is and walk by, slightly embarrassed, on the other side of the virtual information highway.

There is, however, a spiritual dimension to blog attacks which is, ironically, conducive to spiritual health and growth. Here I have learned much (as elsewhere) from the master theologian, churchman, public figure, and normal Christian believer, Martin Luther. It is well-known that in his writings in table conversation Luther would often refer to visits from the Devil, how the Devil would come to him and whisper in his ear, accusing him of all manner of filthy sin: “Martin, you are a liar, greedy, lecherous, a blasphemer, a hypocrite. You cannot stand before God.” To which Luther would respond: “Well, yes, I am. And, indeed, Satan, you do not know the half of it. I have done much worse than that and if you care to give me your full list, I can no doubt add to it and help make it more complete. But you know what? My Saviour has died for all my sins – those you mention, those I could add and, indeed, those I have committed but am so wicked that I am unaware of having done so. It does not change the fact that Christ has died for all of them; his blood is sufficient; and on the Day of Judgment I shall be exonerated because he has taken all my sins on himself and clothed me in his own perfect righteousness.’

…Those disturbed by web attacks on their good names should not be so. Believe me, you are much worse than they say, and God is much greater and more gracious than they imagine. It’s bandit country out there on the web but sane people know lunacy when they see it: let the nutters do their nutjobby thing; let the psychos babble; and let the vicious vent. And then, in the tradition of Luther, thank God for bandit country and use the malice you find there to help you appreciate Christ