Mathers Systematic Theology. Norman W. Mathers

of the nineteenth century (ibid:6). The poison of German idealism had been cured (Harris 1998:116). Reid used Newton’s hypothesis that thought contrary to common sense was to be repudiated. John Witherspoon (1723-94) brought the Scottish Common Sense Philosophy to America in the 18^th century as did J. McCosh (1811-94) in the 19^th century. Leaders in America, following the Revolution, welcomed the fact that humanity had a theory of knowledge (epistemology) which became the basis for public morality of a new world order (Harris 1998:126). It was argued that the Bible was a factual book (ibid:127). The Bible and Bacon’s inductive method were brought to America. The Bible, a factual book, was the necessary resource to understand one’s world. Any philosophy which ignored the Bible blasphemed. Evangelicals and those who hold to biblical errancy have committed apostasy and blasphemed against the God of heaven. That evangelicals do teach that the Bible has errors should not surprise us. The current age of grace is predicted in the Scriptures to be characterized by denials of the faith and departures from the truth (1 Tim. 4:1). The scriptures could now be studied and expounded based on the inductive method (Harris 1998:127). The Princeton theology- biblical and theological study – was based on the scientific method of Bacon’s inductive method. James W. Alexander, son of Archibald Alexander was a proponent of this new method. Charles Hodge’s Systematic Theology of the Scriptures was based on this method (ibid: 127-128). The Bible uses the scientific method. It is no longer a valid argument to fault the Bible on this basis. As a historian trained in historiography, the Bible is a historically reliable supernatural book. The testimony of past events on the part of eyewitnesses is completely trustworthy (2 Pet. 1:16-19).

      2.6 The inerrancy debate requires historical analysis and explanation.

      2.6.1 The fundamentalist – modernist controversies did not end in the 1920’s and 1930’s.

      This is an ongoing controversy. The 1920s saw division at Princeton Theological Seminary. In 1929, Doctors J.G. Machen, R.D. Wilson, O.T. Allis, C. VanTil, and N. Stonehouse left Princeton Seminary. These Princeton Doctors and scholars founded Westminster Theological Seminary. The National Association of Evangelicals was founded in 1942 because of the rejection of the authority of the scriptures in many main line denominations (Ockenga 1976 Foreword in Lindsell 1976). The power of the Word of God can be seen in the part that Bible translations played in the making of the American republic. The revision of the King James Version of the Bible was completed on May 20, 1881 in the United States. This was the revision of the New Testament. The revision of the Old Testament was not completed until May 19, 1885. The American Standard Bible had a number of obsolete English words. The clamor came for a continuation of the revision of this Bible. The American Revised Version was published in 1898 (Simms 1936:276). It was a revision rather than a translation (Grant 1961:82). The fundamentalist- modern controversy was seen to be continuing in the battle over bible translations. Thuesen (1999:59) points out that a lawyer, Philip Mauro, attacked the Revised Version. Mauro thought the Greek text upon which the New Testament of the Revised Version was based to be defective. His suspicions were focused on the Greek manuscripts Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. Mauro did not accept the argument that older manuscripts were to be preferred. He had greater distrust for the Vaticanus manuscript. He questioned the origin of the Vaticanus manuscript. He questioned why the Vatican would revise and store these manuscripts unless it supported the Roman Catholic position and the practices of Rome. Mauro thought it contained textual errors and was advantageous to Roman Catholicism. W. Burgon, an English scholar argued that the Revised Version had created uncertainty and doubt in the minds of millions of Christians (ibid:60). Allegiance to the King James Bible was reaffirmed (ibid:111). The translators of the Revised Version could not answer in the affirmative that the Bible was trustworthy in all its teachings (ibid:112). Earlier, the Reformed institutions in Calvin’s Europe in the 17^th century had created a definitive statement on the autographa. This question on the autographs (the originals) of scripture became the center of debates in 19^th and 20^th century America (ibid:114). The Preface of the Revised Standard Version admitted that some phrases and words were unclear and had lost their meaning (ibid:112). J. Oliver Buswell Jr. called for a new translation of the Scriptures by scholars who believed in the infallible Word of God and the deity of the eternal Son of God, Jesus Christ (ibid:124). The first revision of the King James Version was 1881-1895. This revision took place in England. The American Standard Bible [this translation is also called the American Revised Version] was published in 1898 (Simms 1936:276). Grant (1961:97) confirms that it was poorly received in America. The American Revised Standard Version was carried out in America from 1945 to 65 (ibid:4). Thuesen (1999:4) argues that since the Reformation and the Enlightenment these two events shaped the world of English speaking Christians. The Revised Standard Version was published in the United States in 1952 (Bridges & Weigle 1960:v-vi). M.F. Unger objected to the translator’s view that translation was a matter of linguistics not theology. Dr. Unger’s counter argument was that this view disregarded the ministry of the Holy Spirit. The National Association of Evangelicals wanted a new translation of the scriptures. This would eventuate in the New International Version (Thuesen 1999:13). The nineteen fifties in the United States centered around the Bible’s authority (ibid: 4). On this question, English bible translations had not come to a conclusion in 600 years. The Bible testifies to its own authority (2 Tim. 3:16-17 and 2 Pet. 1:20-21) (ibid:124-125). C. I. Scofield argued that fulfilled prophecy was proof of an inspired and inerrant Bible (ibid:125). Luther Weigle claimed that the Revised Standard Version translators were without bias (ibid:128). Fuller Seminary was founded in 1947. It became a neo-evangelical center. G. E. Ladd argued that the Revised Standard Version was not an adequate translation (ibid:129). It translated Isaiah 7:14 as a young woman rather than virgin. This Protestant translation, the Revised Standard Version, claimed to have used the latest scholarly information available (Rosenberg 1961:25). The Revised Standard Bible had become a catalyst and created a great deal of confusion in the area of biblical hermeneutics (Thuesen 1999:129). In 1953, Evangelical Theological Society requested revisions in the Revised Standard Version. They appointed J. R. Mantey to see if cooperation was possible with the Revised Standard Version translators. Negotiations failed. In 1969, the National Association of Evangelicals and the Christian Reformed Church met at Trinity College in Illinois. It was decided a new translation of the scriptures was needed. The new translation of the bible would be called the New International Version (ibid:135). Another reason for evangelical scholars taking the limited inerrancy position is their failure to make allowance for transcriptions made by those who copied the manuscripts. Metzger (1968:186-203) affirms that prior to the fourth century manuscripts were copied by hand. Often, the copyists were those who made translations without any skill in the original languages (ibid:14). Trained scribes both Christian and non-Christian reproduced manuscripts by hand . This was done when a lector was reading the manuscript aloud. Scribal errors were made because of inattentiveness (ibid:15). Manuscripts were checked for accuracy by a corrector (diorthotes). Mistakes were corrected with annotations in the margin. Monks copied manuscripts by hand during the Byzantine period. Errors could have occurred in the copying due to eyesight, difficulty in hearing, errors of mind and judgment, intentional interpolations, and spelling and grammatical changes. A scribe with an eyesight problem would have difficulty in distinguishing the letters of the manuscript. The errors of the mind would occur when the scribe glanced at the manuscript then glanced away to copy it down (ibid:192). Changes may have been introduced for doctrinal reasons. Sleepy or dull scribes may have made unintentional errors. Temptations came to harmonize parallel accounts. Variant readings are easily sifted depending on the theology presented in the text and the context. Burns (2001:45) gives us another reason why evangelical scholars have been turned to limited inerrancy. This is because a number of evangelical scholars have had to take their doctorates in secular universities. They were without any biblical training. Burns concludes that they are easily turned to limited inerrancy. They believe the bible is full of errors. The last reason that explains those who believe the bible is only reliable in matters of salvation, faith, and practice but not in history, science, geography, and mathematics is some have committed apostasy. The limited inerrancy position argues that the Bible is trustworthy in matters of salvation, faith, and practice but not in other matters. In his book The Battle for The Bible, Harold Lindsell informed of the issue of the infallibility of the Scriptures. The question of whether the Bible is trustworthy or partially so (1976:23). Jesus himself warned of apostasy in his teaching (Luke 8:13; Matt.