Have you ever looked inside your Bible, and seen those notes that say,
"The better manuscripts do not contain this,"
"The best manuscripts do not have these verses,"
"The better manuscripts say this and not that"?
That, brothers and sisters, is called Textual Criticism.
I'd like to talk to you about the fruit of Textual Criticism.
Hi, I'm David Daniels from Chick Publications.
Jesus talked a lot about fruit in Matthew 7:15-20. He said,
15 “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing,
but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits.
Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit;
but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit,
neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit
is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”
You can't miss it from Jesus' words, can you?
Fruit is what God wants, and it's GOOD fruit.
What does God call "good fruit"?
conversion of sinners is a good fruit. In 7:4, it's good works.
In 15:28, it's giving to missions
and to the aid of brothers and sisters in Christ who need something.
Those are all good fruits that God likes.
Galatians 5:22-23, of course, is another list of good fruit.
Listen to this one:
22 “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering,
gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance:
against such there is no law.”
That's the fruit God's looking for.
Not one place in the entire Bible is DOUBT called a fruit.
Check it for yourself.
And yet this is exactly what I find in textual critics, textual criticism,
and in the people strongly influenced by textual critics and textual criticism.
It's funny. If all this stuff about "getting back to the word of God" were true,
You'd expect that in one of these "excised Bibles" here
where they cut out all the things that they didn't want,
there would be FRUIT of FAITH, evangelism, giving to missions
--there'd be SOMEthing! The fruit of the Spirit!
But all I find... is Bart Ehrman.
Doubters!
Like this. Kiersopp Lake. For many years he followed the theories
of Westcott and Hort, and
the guy who made the text that is now called the "Majority Text,"
(but it's not, I'll get to that), Von Soden. He said,
after years of paying attention and doing their rules,
“In spite of the claims of Westcott and Hort and of Von Soden,
we do not know the original form of the Gospels,
and it is quite likely that we NEVER SHALL.”
Then another guy: Frederick Cornwallis Conybeare.
He wrote this before he died in 1924,
major credentials (see Look What's Missing, p. 55):
“…the ultimate text (meaning New Testament),
if there ever was one that deserves to be so called,
is for ever irrecoverable.”
Like I said here, Textual Criticism is not an act of faith.
It is an act of doubt and leads only to despair.
When you see a person who really believes Textual Criticism,
do you see them as armed soul winners? or as armchair quarterbacks?
Do you see them fighting the enemy, or fighting the believers?
It is said that those who can, do. Those who can't teach.
And those who can't do or teach, are critics.
Brothers and sisters, there are only two options: faith or doubt.
I know so many people who've read the King James Bible and believe it,
and the fruit is FAITH and acts of faith,
and winning others to the faith.
Faith or doubt: it's your choice.
I'm just presenting it before you.
God bless you, and have a wonderful day.