The Pathfinder
#263.15
HISTORICAL VIEW OF THE SCRIPTURES
THE WRITTEN WORD
THE HEBREW & GREEK
THE LATIN VULGATE
ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS
THE ANOINTING THAT TEACHES
The Scriptures
have been
Judaism and Christianity’s primary guidebook: the Torah (meaning
Instruction-the 5 Books of Moses) and the *[1]Talmud (meaning
Learning) for the Jews; and the Old and New Testaments have been the choice
for the Christians. The scriptures have especially been a guiding light and an
integral part of all Christian faiths. Since it is such an important factor in
so many lives, it would behoove us to look into how various Bible translations
as we know them came to be. Although we will not address the accuracy, or
inaccuracy, of certain words or verses in particular, we believe that knowing
how the scriptures evolved over the centuries will lead us to a greater
understanding of why we believe many of the things we do. The following is not
meant to be critical by any means, but only to glean from the exhaustive, yet
still incomplete, research extended to this endeavor. Therefore, let us advance
our understanding as we consider the history of the written Word.
THE WRITTEN WORD
When the scriptures were first
written, which was primarily in the Aramaic, Hebrew-Chaldee, and Greek
languages, and they were "given by inspiration of God, which are profitable
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Timothy 3:16-17. However, that which has been handed down to us
in this present age, in some respects, leaves a few things to be questioned, and
could cause us to wonder if that which we have been taught has been from the
most accurate version(s) of the scriptures. If not, how much of what we believe
is the indisputable, infallible, inspired Word of God? Ironically, there is not
one translation that lays claim to being infallible.
In this pursuit, let us begin by noting:
The Process of Rendering Translations
"In order to establish the best possible text,
scholars must first collect all of the significant variants and information
about the manuscripts in which they occur. As a practical matter, a critical
text—one with a version of the Greek or Hebrew on the page and...footnotes
giving variations and their source manuscripts.... Scholars must then determine
whether they will accept the readings in the text or adopt instead one of the
alternatives.
"They may first rely on external evidence. This
would include matters such as the age of the manuscript in which the variant
occurs, since older manuscripts are generally closer to the original than later
ones; or whether the variant occurs in manuscripts from one region. They will
also use internal evidence: In general, shorter readings are preferable to
longer ones, since scribes are more likely to add to a text than to delete
materials (though, in the case of offensive or theologically challenging texts,
deletion must be considered); difficult readings, including awkward phrases,
coarse words, and poor grammar, are preferable to being deleted, since scribes
might try to ‘correct’ such difficulties; and stylistic considerations can help
judgment about how a particular author would have written.
"The task would be difficult enough if scholars
could be sure that the original wording in any place with a variant reading was
preserved in at least one manuscript; but even that is not necessarily the case.
There are instances where no existing manuscript is likely to preserve the
original wording, or where the original text does not make sense as far as
current scholarship can determine. In such cases scholars must assume that the
original wording of the text has been lost or distorted in the course of the
copying process. They then have several options open to them. One, called
conjectural *[2]emendation, is to
conjecture based on the text as it now stands or what the original wording might
have been.
"This can often be based on a scholar’s general
knowledge of the ancient languages, just as an English speaker can notice, and
mentally correct, a typographical error in a modern book without having access
to the author’s manuscript. Another option is the possibility of the
consultation of the ancient versions. Finally, scholars may have to admit defeat
and acknowledge that. Given the current state of our knowledge, it is impossible
to determine what the original wording might have been. For instance, at 1
Samuel 13:1, the translation shows, by the use of ellipsis ( . . . ), that a
word (the age of Saul when he began to reign) is missing. The translator’s note
points out that this number is not in the Hebrew text, and that the obvious
second place to look for it is the Greek Septuagint and does not include any
part of the verse. It is therefore impossible to recover the original wording
unless some other ancient manuscript source is discovered." Survey of
the Old & New Testament with the Apocryphal Writings, Edited by J.K. Stewart:
https://www.academia.edu/
With this exegesis, we can see that it is literally
impossible to render an exact translation of the original manuscripts.
Notwithstanding, let us now glance briefly into the past and see how the written
word has evolved, especially since the time of the apostles. I believe this will
help in coming to a knowledge that will be profitable.
THE HEBREW & GREEK
All the combined books of the
Bible, from Genesis through Malachi, is called the Old Testament, as the
biblical scholars tell us that there were no original, firsthand, inspired
manuscripts in existence during the first century A.D. By this time the pure
Hebrew manuscripts of animal skins had evolved at the hands of the scribes as
the modern synagogue—scrolls and written primarily in the Aramaic and Greek
languages. The Greek translation of the Old Testament is the
Septuagint and is regarded by most authorities as not being a very accurate
translation. Notwithstanding, since the Septuagint was widely used in the
synagogues, these were the manuscripts the Apostles most likely used to confirm
by the letter what they were manifesting by the Spirit, according to Smith's
Bible Dictionary.
When the New Testament was
written, which were letters to various Christian assemblies, they were also
written in Greek. Unlike the Septuagint, which was a translation from other
translations, their words were inspired by the Spirit of Christ. Yet, there are
not any known original letters at our disposal. The earliest existing
manuscripts of the New Testament are the Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209 and Codex
Sinaiticus, both dating from the 4th century A.D.
The canonizing of the Bible has
gone through various phases. There are many works that never found their way
into the Bible. This was due to being lost or simply not esteemed as being
worthy to be in the collection with other sacred writings. The book of Jasher is
one that the prophet Samuel felt was worthy enough to quote from, "Behold, it is
written in the book of Jasher..." 2 Samuel 1:18. It is also
mentioned in Joshua 10:15, "Is not this written in the book
of Jasher?" Some of the others are "The Wars of the Lord, Samuel on the Kingdom,
Chronicles of David, Acts of Solomon," etc. (Young's Analytical
Concordance).
Even with a Bible that could have
contained more books, we still have ample information to point us to Jesus
Christ in whom life is found. However, with the awful cloud of the Dark-Ages and
its future influence upon Christianity, it is a wonder that any truth at all
survived. From 400 A.D., after Constantine had formed a one-world church by
incorporating the pagan religions of the known world, along with Christianity,
to the late 10th century, there was hardly any learning at all. Knowledge from
the ancient Romans survived only in a few monastery, cathedral, and palace
schools. Knowledge acquired from ancient Greece almost disappeared, and the
people, in their ignorance, accepted popular stories, myths, and rumors as
truth.
THE VULGATE
The difficulty with anyone outside
of the State-established church in being able to read the scriptures was
compounded by the use of the Vulgate, which was a Latin translation of the
Bible.
The Latin version of the Bible was
first birthed in the 2nd century by the Latin speaking churches of North Africa,
and drifted greatly from the Greek and Hebrew texts. Nevertheless, they used
this inferior translation until the 4th century. A critical ecclesiastical
revision was made in Northern Italy. By then they were using a version of the
Latin Vulgate. This, however, was of little help; for it was very poorly
translated as well, and by the end of the 4th century the Latin texts of the
Bible had fallen into the greatest corruption.
Jerome (329 - 420 A.D.) was
responsible for a more accurate translation of the scriptures to the Latin; but
it too was lacking. His several versions were adopted by the church along with
other Latin versions that became available, and by the 8th century the
corruption had arrived at such a height that Charlemagne instructed Alcuin to
revise the Latin text, which was considered one of the more accurate Vulgates.
However, by the 15th century many others were also being used, and the invention
of the printing press created a flood of unreliable texts. When the
Council of Trent declared the Vulgate to be the authoritative text of scripture,
the need of a standard text became more urgent than ever. An edition was then
published in 1590 under the superintendence of the Pope Sixtus V. This version
had the famous constitution prefixed in which Sixtus affirmed the total
authority of the edition for all future time. It was, however, soon found that
this edition also was defective; and accordingly another edition was prepared
under papal authority. It appeared in 1592 in the Pontificate of Clement VIII.
This version helped some but not a great deal. All in all, the Old Testament
suffered the most at the hands of the Latin translators. In the New Testament
far more has been done for the correction of the Vulgate, though even here, yet
to date, no critical edition has been published. Nonetheless, the vast power
which the Vulgate has had in determining the theological terms and beliefs of
Western Christendom can hardly be overrated. By far the greater part of the
current doctrine and terminology have been based on the Vulgate. It was also the
Vulgate that Martin Luther used in translating his German version of the Bible,
and from Luther the influence of the Latin passed on to our own Authorized King
James Version. (Above information compiled from pages 732-735 of Smith's
Bible Dictionary).
ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS
Even with the increase of education
and knowledge after the 10th century, it was not until the 14th century that the
first spark of light was apparently seen, and it was made manifest in the life
of John Wycliffe. He was the pride of Oxford University—the foremost
scholar of his day and the most influential preacher in England. In his
preaching and many writings he openly denounced the papacy and declared that the
Pope was antichrist, meaning that he was working in opposition to Christ. This
boldness normally would have merited one to be burned at the stake, but some
royal families befriended him and hindered the desires of the church.
Wycliffe had seen that there were
four primary ways that Satan had used antichrist and his worldly clerks of the
religious system to destroy Holy writ along with true doctrine. These four
accursed ways or false reasons, as he stated, are:
1) The church is of more authority, and more to be
believed than any gospel.
2) As Augustine said, the gospel cannot be believed unless
the church teaches it.
3) No man alive knows what the gospel is, unless the
church approves it.
4) There is no cause to believe any gospel unless the
church confirms and teaches it.
(Great Voices of The Reformation, H.E. Fosdick, pg. 18).
Wycliffe (1320 - 1384) recognized that men had taken over the
affairs of God and had made His written word of none effect by preaching and
driving these four points deep into hearts and minds of the uneducated people.
They had taken doctrinal truths of living Gold and replaced them with iron-clad
shackles of death; and a large portion of Christendom is still bowing obediently
to many of these erroneous doctrines and ideas of old.
Regardless of the gross darkness that had covered the souls
of men for so many ages, this did not hinder God from shining His light into
this Hungarian vessel of honor, and He did not allow that light to be snuffed
out after he died and then forty-one years later in 1425 Wycliffe was exhumed
and burned along with his books and Bibles, especially his dreaded English
Bible, and the ashes of his bones and books scattered into the River Swift. The
living flame was not extinguished by religious men’s spiteful acts of hatred.
In 1572, a picture was published in a Bohemian psalter
representing Wycliffe striking a spark, John Huss kindling the coals, and Martin
Luther brandishing the flaming torch. This is a perfect picture of how God had
used these three men to begin the enlightenment of His people out of the
apostasy of the Dark Ages. Not only has that torch been carried by other members
of His body, but today we look to the hour when His ministers are seen as
flaming fire, as in Psalm 104:4.
William Tyndale
(1492 - 1536) was another light and
lively stone that God used to lift His chosen people out of the awful pit of the
Dark Ages. He, being a pious man of God, and well accomplished in the Greek and
Hebrew languages, spent many hours studying the few manuscripts that were
available at that time. Despite his handicap of not having reliable texts of the
ancient languages, seeing the error of the Church's many doctrines and the
pitiful condition of the people's souls, he set out to translate the New
Testament into the English of his day, hoping to print and distribute them to
the common people of England. However, he was not able to get the support of the
Bishop of London while translating it, and getting it printed was even a greater
obstacle. Both, the Church and State declared that the laity had no business
with Bibles—that it would only add confusion and disorder to the Church.
Therefore, the printing of his translation of the New Testament was prevented in
England.
He continued to pursue this great quest however, and by
crossing the Channel to Wittenberg, Germany, he met Martin Luther. In 1525, with
Luther's aid and encouragement, they were able to get prints made of his English
manuscripts. They then smuggled these manuscripts into England, but not without
the endeavor costing Tyndale his life. Although he did not personally go back to
England at that time with his illegal contraband, the Church was so outraged by
the Truth-bearing Light that his translation had brought to England, they sent a
friend to betray him. He was deceitfully persuaded to come back to England,
where he was arrested and imprisoned in the castle of Vilvoorden, tried and
convicted. He was first strangled, and then burnt in the prison yard, Oct. 6,
1536. His last words were, "Lord, open the king of England's eyes."
In the face of adversity and strong opposition, Myles
Coverdale was another beacon of light who carried the torch of Truth one
step further. Just before Tyndale died, Coverdale translated the first complete
Bible into English, which was based on the Latin Vulgate, Tyndale's New
Testament, and Luther's German Bible. He was also the first to separate the
Apocrypha from the Old Testament and place it as an appendix. King Henry VIII
was very much opposed to Tyndale's book, declaring very severely that: "...It
is not necessary that the scripture should be in the English tongue, and placed
in the hands of the common people; but that the distribution of the scripture,
and the believing or denying of them, depends only upon the discretion of the
superiors, as they think it convenient. And that the translation of the New
Testament and the Old into the vulgar tongue of English would cause the people
to be inclined to erroneous opinions, and would increase the errors among the
said people, without any benefit or commodity toward the good of their souls.
And that it shall now be more convenient that the same people should have the
holy scripture expounded to them, by preachers in their sermons, according as it
has been of old time accustomed before this time."
Although the written word was coming to be more common, and
certainly not perfect, there was always something hindering its evolution.
Renowned men who were steeped in tradition and fearing loss of control would
undermine these works; but they continued, nevertheless.
In 1537, John Rogers, an associate of Tyndale, translated his
version of the Bible, which was later recognized as the Matthew Bible and
then as the Cranmer Bible. He did not have an understanding of Hebrew, so
it is acclaimed that two-thirds of his Bible was from Tyndale and one-third from
Coverdale. Rogers was martyred in 1555, and two years later Thomas Cranmer, the
Archbishop of Canterbury, was also burned at the stake following his conversion
to Christ and true doctrine. However, it is to Cranmer that England is indebted
for the legacy of an Open Bible, and for this enlightenment, it is
certain that he did not die in vain.
The Great Bible
was printed in 1539, and Coverdale played
a major part in its processing. For the most part however, this Bible was
translated from the Tyndale and Coverdale's own Bible and ironically, although
King Henry VIII gave royal approval of The Great Bible, he issued an order that
Tyndale's and Coverdale's could not be received or owned by anyone.
The legacy left by Queen Mary (1553—1558) was that
during her reign, no Bible was printed in England. However, in 1560 a
group of scholars in Geneva produced an English version called The Geneva
Bible, followed by a second edition in 1652. This was the first English
version to use numbered verses as separate paragraphs. It was designated as
The People's Book and was the Bible that was brought over on the
Mayflower. The Puritans used it, and it held preeminence over all other English
versions for seventy-five years. During that time there were one hundred-forty
editions of The Geneva Bible to appear.
The Bishops' Bible was next in line to be printed in English.
The popularity of The Geneva Bible persuaded the Anglican authorities that they
should produce a Bible which could bear the authority of the Church of England.
Therefore, Archbishop Parker appointed a committee to accomplish this task. They
were to use The Great Bible as their basis and were also to check with the Greek
and Hebrew texts. The reason for using another translation as their foundation,
rather than adhering strictly to the Greek and Hebrew, was that the scholarship
of these Bishops was lacking greatly in these two languages. By using The Great
Bible as a guide, they were in essence compiling The Bishops' translation
from Tyndale's translation of Coverdale's translation from Cranmer's
translation. Therefore, this translation was far inferior to the Geneva
Bible, even so, it is The Bishops' Bible to which the King James Version is
so closely related.
The last two Bibles to be considered before the King James
Version are those known as the Rheims New Testament (1582) and the
Douay Old Testament (1609), both Roman Catholic volumes. Until the recent
translation by the late Monsignor Ronald A. Knox, these two, combined as one
complete Bible and called the Douay Bible. It was the only Bible approved
by the Roman Catholic Church. The New Testament part of the Douay Bible was
extensively used by the king James revisers.
It is now time to consider the most important English version
of the Bible ever to be produced, sometimes called The Authorized Version,
but is usually referred to as The King James Version.
When James the 1st ascended the throne of England in 1605, he
found himself heir to a religious turmoil and confusion that had characterized
the entire 16th Century. In the hope of bringing order out of chaos, he called a
meeting of churchmen early the following year. The only fruitful suggestion
brought forth was a proposal that a new translation that would be acceptable and
useful to the entire church system and be made of holy writ. Most of those
present were against this thought, but the King ordered it to be done.
Forty-seven clergymen and lay-scholars were chosen for this task. The group was
divided into six companies, each taking a part of the text. Each man worked
independently, then as a company. They considered their individual efforts until
all were in agreement. As sections were completed, they were handed to other
companies for criticism. Finally, a committee of two members from each company
harmonized the entire undertaking.
Fifteen rules were to bind this large number of revisers. The
first was: "The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the
Bishops’ Bible, is to be followed, and as little altered as the truth of the
original will permit." A Brief History of the King James Bible By
Dr. Laurence M. Vance. The Bishops' Bible is the one that was
compiled from the Tyndale, Coverdale, and Cranmer translations.
The Old Testament rested upon the same Masoretic Hebrew text
as did all subsequent versions; but inasmuch as no ancient manuscripts of the
Greek New Testament arrived in England until 1628, those responsible for this
"greatest of all versions", did not have the advantage of the best Greek
text. It is of no wonder therefore, that, according to one source: "Blaney's
Bible (1769) added thirty thousand four hundred and ninety-five passages, and
further additions were made by Clark (1810) and Scott (1822). Bagster's Bible
(1846) contains five hundred thousand references, but this number was so large
that it proved to be an encumbrance."
http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/anstey/5a0n.0106_04b.htm
If all the original errors of the King James Version of the
Bible were corrected with the Authorized marginal references, we would not be
able to recognize it as the King James Bible. And then, if we corrected all the
errors that this new translation would still have, we might not be able to
recognize the new translation either.
Nonetheless, the team of translators did a marvelous job with
what they had to work with, and the poetry and prose of the King James Version
was a literary marvel. It crowded out all preceding translations. For the first
time, England was reading one Bible at home and hearing the same one read in
church. "It thus became bound up with the life of the nation. Since it
stilled the controversy over the best rendering, it gradually came to be
accepted as absolute truth, and in the minds of myriads there was no distinction
between this version and the ancient texts, and they may almost be said to have
believed in the literal inspiration of the very words which composed it"
(Albert S. Cook). Let me add that many of those in today’s Christian religions
still feel the same way.
We can understand why people would take the written word
and mold their lives by it, that is, if the word was the original
manuscripts in its pure form or even an exact translation. However, after
knowing the transformations that the letter has gone through and having
understanding of the present condition of our modern versions of the Bible, we
are simply amazed to see the reverence and worship given to every jot and
tittle of something that was never meant to be worshiped, much less that
which has gone into such aberrations and change.
Many of us, and perhaps all of us, have been guilty, or are
presently guilty, of esteeming God's written word above Him. This, I believe, is
attributed to not knowing Him, and the less we know Him the more we are prone to
substitute knowing about Him for the reality of His person, which, of course, is
found in Jesus. Everything that is real, all the life and mysteries of God,
are found only in Him. Colossians 2:2-3. God-life is not found
in a book, not even if the book is the Bible. Have you ever noticed, when the
Lord does speak a truth to us by a revelation from His Spirit within our very
being, that before we will believe it, we sometimes go to one of our favorite
translations, which is usually the King James Version, to make sure what we
heard is true, as if we either misheard or hypothetically, the Holy Spirit might
lie to us. However, if we do not know our Lord well enough to be able to
distinguish His voice from our own, or some other's, then let it be our
confirming source, but not without the use of some good Greek and Hebrew
concordances, lexicons, and Greek-English interlinear New Testaments. The
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance is good, but even Dr. Strong did not have the
final say on every Greek and Hebrew word contained in the original manuscripts;
therefore, a variety of study aids are sometimes useful if we want to get a more
accurate rendering of the Scriptures.
I pray that I am not misunderstood in what is being related
concerning the scriptures. To set the record straight, I am not saying
that we do not need the Bible, nor am I suggesting we should discard it and stop
reading and comparing scripture with scripture; but I am saying that we should
put the letter in its proper perspective and use it as the tool for which it has
been designed, and to stop placing it over God and His living word of
inspiration. Therefore, let us compare that which is in writing to that which is
spoken by the anointing.
In the book of John, Jesus referred to the scriptures as
being the instrument for which they were designed; but because of the omission
of one word by the King James translators, it has led some to believe that we
can find the life of God in something else other than Jesus Christ. The KJV,
among some others, has it as: "Search the scriptures: for in them ye
think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me."
John 5:39. It sounds as if He is giving them a command to
search the scriptures in order to have eternal life. If this verse was
really examined, even as it is in the KJV, we could see that this is not what
Jesus was saying.
Let us notice how it is worded according to Bible scholar
Benjamin Wilson in the Emphatic Diaglott: "You search the writings
(graph ) , because you think in them life aionian to have. and they are
those testifying concerning me; and you are not willing to come to
me so that life you may have." John 5:39-40. By
using the personal pronoun you (as the verb is in the
second person) and noticing the words, you think
(which is very often overlooked), enables us to see what He was actually
saying to the religious leaders of that day. Rather than Jesus encouraging or
commanding them to read the letter of the word so that they could have Life, He
was making a statement about something that they were already doing but were
missing the mark in their efforts. They were searching the scriptures
and thinking that this is where eternal life was found. They
were seeking life, seeking more knowledge, seeking more information; but they
refused He to whom it all pointed, the only One that could give them that
wonderful Life—JESUS! And I do not hesitate to say that we are not so
much unlike those to whom He spoke that day.
We may have prided ourselves in not only being able to search
and dig out knowledgeable or truth (facts) from the Bible, but we have also
congratulated ourselves for memorizing the scriptures. Brethren, it matters not
if we know every verse in the entire Bible, if we do not know Jesus in the
reality of Himself and become the word that we have learned by rote, then we
have gained nothing in the realm of His Life and are as a sounding brass and
tinkling cymbal. A lot of clamor and clatter may have been streaming from our
lips, but where has the essence of THE WORD, CHRIST JESUS, been? If He
has not been in that shout, in that war cry, in that Word of 1st
Thessalonians 4:16, we then may be spiritually dead. For sure, if He
is not in the words that we have been declaring, those words are as much of the
letter that kills as the letter of the scriptures. The letter without the
Spirit, whether written or spoken, always kills; but the Spirit always gives
life. Some of us may have had a more accurate word because of our understanding
of the Hebrew and Greek, but without the Life of Christ being in our word, we
are not much better off than those who can quote thousands of scriptures from
the King James Bible or some other translation.
Paul gave us some insight concerning the letter in
these words, "Who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament
(Jesus); not of the letter, but of the Spirit:
for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life." 2 Corinthians 3:6.
Like it or not, Brethren, we are going to have to come to the place in Christ
where we can see what the letter IS and what the letter IS NOT. It is good to
apply the written word to our lives as it was intended, as a guide to the
greater glory which is Christ; however, when we dogmatically and religiously
follow every jot recorded, and then call ourselves holy and righteous—this is
death! When we are looking at the printed word and doctrines as our Life, our
whole life can be caught up in reading, in searching, in studying, and we have
no time for our Lord. When death is our life, then how dead is
that life.
There was a time when the letter had some glory, as Paul
continued in 2nd Corinthians 3:7-18; stating that even
though it was "the ministration of death...it was glorious, so
that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for
the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away. But their
minds were. blinded; for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in
the reading of the old testament (covenant); which veil is done away in
Christ. But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the
Lord, are changed into the same image from glory (of the law) to glory
(of Christ), even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (parentheses supplied).
Is the veil still over our eyes? If we are looking to the glory of the letter
for our source of Life, then indeed, our eyes are veiled from the reality of
the Truth; however, when the Spirit is LORD, as Paul wrote, the veil of the law
is removed and we begin to fulfill it by nature rather than by works of the
flesh. There is a difference, Brethren, whether we fulfill the scriptures
due to it being our nature, or we do them out of the resources of our own
religious efforts.
We can teach a chimpanzee to sit and display perfect manners
at the dinner table, but even so, this does not make it a human being, it
remains a chimpanzee. The same principle can be applied to us. We can act
religious and quote scriptures until the cows come home, but that avails nothing
in the economy of God; for we must be by the Spirit or it avails little, if
anything. This is one kingdom that we are not going to talk or impress our way
into. Again, we are not saying that we must discard our Bibles or to stop
studying, but since Jesus is the only way unto Life, then let us not try to use
the letter as a vehicle to enter the glory of God, especially a letter that has
become so degraded and inaccurate.
THE ANOINTING THAT TEACHES
Although the written word, regardless of how accurate it is
in the ancient manuscripts, it is still dead. But please know, it was not dead
when it was written, but most likely was by the time the ink dried, yet not dead
to the penman, but to those who read it. When the prophets and apostles received
and wrote the Word of God, it was very much alive because of the anointing that
it was received and written by. However, when we read those same scriptures, and
they are not read by the same anointing wherein they were written, they are then
dead.
It may be hard to imagine how such a holy word could possibly
produce death, but hopefully we can explain. In Romans 14:23
it is stated, "...whatsoever is not of faith is sin," and of course we know that
"the wages of sin is death," Romans 6:23; therefore, when
we apply a dead word to our lives, in essence we are receiving death rather than
life. How then, we might ask, are we to read the Bible without it being more of
a danger to us than a help?
One thing that is very important to remember concerning this:
"Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."
Romans 10:17. The older Greek manuscripts have it as "The
Word of the Anointing," i.e. "ἄρα ἡ διὰ ῥήματος Χριστοῦ." Paul did not say that faith, His faith, comes
by hearing the scriptures quoted, but by hearing the anointed word. You
might be surprising to some; but there is no place in the Bible where the scriptures are called "the
word of God." Therefore, the hearing is by the living, vibrant, anointed,
spoken word
from God. This word is heard as an inspiration, as a revelation, as
an unction from the holy One. It is hearing a word by the
anointing, as the verse says in the Greek: "Faith comes by hearing, and
hearing by the anointing" of the holy Spirit that abides in us.
This is what produces the
faith that enables us to do or be whatever it is that He quickens to us. We can
also remember that we are saved (delivered) "...through faith: and
that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God." Ephesians
2:8.
When He gives us His gift of faith by us hearing His word, it
then becomes our own, such as, when a mother bakes and decorates a cake from all
the ingredients that belong to her, and then she gives it to her son for his
birthday, the cake becomes his. He owns it. Likewise, once the Lord gives us His
faith, it is then our faith, and that faith will make us whole as noted in
Matthew 9:22. His faith, now our faith, has the power to
remove mountains, Matthew 17:20; for what He gives to us
becomes ours; but presumptive thoughts and desires that are formed in our minds
is not faith that we are bringing before us today. Wishful
thinking or doctrinal teachings cannot save us nor can it remove mountains that
are set before us.
And according to the record, when a prophet was guilty of
presumption, saying that God had said something when He had not, they were put
to death. This is what is happening to so many of us today. We are saying,
"Thus saith the Lord" when we sometimes should be saying, "Thus
the Lord once said, for it is written..." Therefore, when we
assume that God has spoken but has not, we pass the sentence of death upon
ourselves. On the other hand, however, if we have been speaking words that we
have received by the anointing, then we live and those who hear by the Spirit
live also. The apostle John related this in reference to the anointing and its
function in our lives: "But the anointing which ye have received of Him abideth
in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing
teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath
taught you, ye shall abide in Him." 1 John 2:27. With this
we can see that it makes no difference whether it is the written word from the
Bible or from some other writings or the spoken words from men's lips, if the
anointing that abides within quickens it to us; that word will produce
the gift of faith and strength enough to slay the dragon that is in the sea.
This is the Word, the Anointed, Living Word that we can hold to
and not be ashamed or found guilty of moving in presumption.
There is nothing wrong with Christians being positive
thinkers, and it is a good thing to live a positive life in Christ, knowing
that "greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world." But we
should never confuse our natural positive thinking as being that thing which
will solve all of our earthly and spiritual problems.
In closing, let us know that it is good to read, study,
and prove what are scriptural truths; but it is better to rightly divide
the word (logos) of truth. The Logos, of course, is not
the written word. The Logos is the essence, the substance of Jesus Christ who
is the truth. Therefore, in all of our reading musing over the scriptures,
let us store these bounties in our spiritual minds until the time comes for them
to be quicken and made alive in us. Christ’s Life will then spring forth that
will produce a living, working, effectual faith unto salvation and the
manifestation of the sons of God!
Elwin R. Roach
|