Canonicity as Applied to Words

aefting · Sep 3, 2003

Here is another quote from Thou Shalt Keep Them. This is an excerpt from Kent Brandenburg’s chapter, Test of Canonicity as Applied to Words. I don’t see how it gets much worse than this:

The discernible period of time, during which this task of Word preservation proceeded to the printed edition, lasted from early sixteenth century to early seventeenth century. This approximately 125 year period (c. 1516-1633) conservatively equals the same length as the period of canonization of the books of the New Testament, or perhaps even shorter. During this time the churches incrementally progressed in their agreement over which Words were canonical. Men printed various editions of the Greek New Testament. These editions rarely varied from each other. The text represented by this procession of printed editions was known as the Textus Receptus, the text that was received by the churches, using the Scriptural designation for what God told the churches to do with His Words, namely, receive them.

During the initial time in which the twenty-seven books were amalgamated and then canonized, the churches waited patiently for mutual agreement on the books. During this crucial time, churches patiently waited on the mutual agreement on the canonical Words. The churches agreed on the Words in the text behind the King James Version of Scripture. Although the words of the printed editions do vary, albeit seldom, there is as comprehensive testimony to the agreement among the churches over the canonicity of the Words as there was agreement over the canonicity of the books. At this time the English speaking churches became a large majority of New Testament churches, and they agreed on the King James Version and the text behind it. The obedient churches speaking the next most prominent language also agreed on the Textus Receptus as the New Testament (pp. 203-204)
Click to expand...

DCK · Sep 3, 2003

He gives the impression that English-speaking churches got together and voted on the canonicity of the words of the KJV. I don't recall this ever happening. Besides, as we know, there are different editions of the KJV, and their wording is not identical. So, on what words did these churches agree? Also, the use of the term "obedient churches" is clearly a slanted use of language.

Canonicity as Applied to Words

aefting New Member

DCK New Member

Useful Searches

Canonicity as Applied to Words

aefting New Member

DCK New Member