Christ Church

The David Chronicles 2: Birth and Dedication of Samuel

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

We begin this story with the birth and dedication of Samuel. As with many of God’s great men, Samuel’s birth was remarkable. God loves the pattern of death and resurrection, and He also loves the pattern of barrenness followed by fruitfulness. We can see the same truth in how He makes the wilderness become a garden. God loves the narrative arc of salvation stories. So should we.

The Text

“Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite: And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children. And this man went up out of his city yearly to worship and to sacrifice unto the LORD of hosts in Shiloh. And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, the priests of the LORD, were there. And when the time was that Elkanah offered, he gave to Peninnah his wife, and to all her sons and her daughters, portions: But unto Hannah he gave a worthy portion; for he loved Hannah: but the LORD had shut up her womb . . .” (1 Sam. 1:1-28).

Summary of the Text

As we work through this book, we will go chapter by chapter. But as we have noted, these modern divisions were not in the original text, so we will also notice how their structures and divisions sometimes “slop over” the edges of ours. Here is the first example of that:

a Elkanah and family go up from Ramah to Shiloh yearly in order to worship (1:1-8)
b Hannah’s prayer of misery (1:9-11)
c Sad conversation between Eli and Hannah (1:12-18) d Samuel is born (1:19-23)
d Samuel is born (1:19-23)
c’ Happy conversation between Eli and Hannah (1:24-28)
b’ Hannah’s prayer of rejoicing (2:1-10)
a’ Elkanah and family return from Shiloh to Ramah, without Samuel (2:11) .

A man named Elkanah from Ramah had two wives, one of whom, Hannah, was childless (vv. 1-2). This man was a faithful worshipper of God at Shiloh, but Shiloh is introduced to us as connected to the two corrupt sons of Eli (v. 3). Elkanah provided a portion for both wives, but took special care of Hannah (vv. 4-5). Peninnah was Hannah’s adversary, and provoked her every year (vv. 6-7). Elkanah tried in vain to comfort her (v. 8). After one such episode, after they had eaten and drunk, Hannah went to the temple of the Lord to pray, and Eli was watching her (v. 9). She was in great bitterness of soul, wept grievously, and made a vow to God (vv. 10-11). She promised to dedicate any baby boy as a lifetime Nazarite (v. 11). Because of the way she was praying, Eli thought she was drunk and rebuked her (vv. 12-14). Hannah replies that she is not a daughter of Belial (a worthless covenant member), but rather that she was praying through her great grief (vv. 15-16). Eli responds by blessing her (v. 17), and she goes away contented (v. 18). They then worshipped first thing in the morning (v. 19), and returned to Ramah, where Hannah became pregnant (v. 19). In due time she had a baby boy, and she named him Samuel (v. 20), which means “God heard.” A few months later, Elkanah goes to Shiloh again (v. 21), but Hannah and Samuel stay behind until he is weaned (v. 22). Elkanah agrees with this (v. 23), and so she went up to Shiloh some time after Samuel was weaned (v. 24). They sacrificed a bullock to the Lord, and brought the child to Eli (v. 25). She reminded Eli who she was (v. 26), and tells him of her answered prayer (v. 27). Samuel is lent to the Lord, and he is left to grow up in the worship of the Lord at Shiloh (v. 28).

Biblical Fruitfulness

First, notice three things in this text. The first is that the Lord was the one who had shut Hannah’s womb (v. 6). Our God is the God who opens and shuts all things. The idea that we can control fruitfulness apart from Him is ludicrous. And secondly, note how Hannah thinks of her barrenness. Third, the point is covenant faithfulness, not simply numbers. If numbers were the only consideration, polygamy would be a great idea. But Peninnah is described as Hannah’s adversary (v. 6). There are different ways that quantity can cause quality to fall apart.

Corruption an Purity

At this point is Israel’s history, the corruption had set in deep. The coming monarchy was a sign of apostasy, but that apostasy was set up beforehand by corruption getting into Israel’s bones, and especially at Shiloh. And yet, even though Hophni and Phinehas were there at Shiloh, a true worshipper of God was willing to leave her son there as a dedicated servant of the Lord. And the Lord received him as such. The history of the church has been marked by imbalance at this point. Either we are perfectionists, separating into our own little sectarian bands over every little thing, or we just go with the corrupt flow. There has to be a faithful biblical way to identify with and challenge at the same time. But never forget that Jesus worshipped in a Temple that was every bit as corrupt as Shiloh was, and every bit as much under judgment.

Sons and Daughters of Belial

Eli rebukes Hannah for drunkenness, and Hannah responds by saying that if that were true, she would be a daughter of Belial, meaning worthlessness. But note also 2 Cor. 6:15. One of the reasons why things get this way is not because people are not rebuked. No, they are. But it is usually the wrong ones. Hannah is rebuked by Eli, even though his sons (who were far worse) were not. Elkanah comforts Hannah, but does not restrain his wife Peninnah. Often we rebuke, not the one who needs it, but rather the one who will take it. This is twisted.

But we have already been introduced to the sons of Eli (v. 3), and few verses later we are told what they were like and why. “Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial; they knew not the LORD” (1 Sam. 2:12). They were covenant members, but unconverted. They were covenantally worthless. If you are attached to externals, if you wrap yourself up in your office, if you go through the motions, but do not know the Lord, what good is it?

Read Full Article

The David Chronicles 1: Introduction and Background

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

The book of Samuel is the repository of some truly great Bible stories. But more than this, it represents the tale of three very complex characters—Samuel, Saul, and David. And behind it all, we see the promises and mercies of the steadfast God. One of the central things we will learn is the ways of God with man—and the attempted ways of man with God.

The Text

“Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite: And he had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah: and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children” (1 Sam. 1:1-2).

Summary of the Text

These are the introductory words to the book of Samuel. We know the book as two books, 1 & 2 Samuel, but originally they were just one. The division was introduced by those who translated the Hebrew version into the Greek. We will therefore find our way around with references to 1 and 2 Samuel, but other than that, we will be treating them as one book. In addition, there are good arguments for treating the first two chapters of 1 Kings as an original part of the book of Samuel.

Who wrote this book? The best answer is probably three-fold—Samuel, Nathan, and Gad (1 Chron. 29:29; cf. 1 Sam. 10:25). Samuel probably died during the period when David was on the run in the wilderness, and so could not have written a significant part of the book.

The story begins, as so many prophetic tales do, with the introduction of a barren woman who is used by God to provide His people a great deliverance. We are introduced first to Elkanah, Samuel’s father, a man who was an Ephrathite (v. 1). In the second verse, we meet his two wives. His barren and well-loved wife is mentioned first, and her name is Hannah. The other wife is named Peninnah (v. 2). And so the stage is set. How does God work?

Some Background

The Philistines were invaders from Crete. They had established a beachhead on the coastal plains on the eastern end of the Mediterranean, and they were almost certainly the reason why the people had begun to clamor for a king. It was necessary, they said, for purposes of national security.

The accession of David to the throne occurred somewhere between the years 1010 and 1000 B.C. The events of this book took place over the course of about a century and a half. We had about 40 years of Philistine oppression, about 30 years as Samuel grew older, and then Saul and David each ruled about 40 years. This gives us the approximate dates of 1115-965 B.C. Because the decentralized system of the judges allowed for more than one judge functioning at a time, Samson and Samuel were probably contemporaries. The rule of Samson likely filled about 20 years between the battles of Aphek (1 Sam. 4) and Ebenezer (1 Sam. 7).

Three Great Plot Points

As we work our way through this book, recognize that the overall theme is one of transition—from the period of the judges to the time of the monarchy. In tracking with this, there are three great sections that mark the historical changes that were underway. We will pay closer attention to them when we get there, but those sections are 1 Sam. 7, 1 Sam. 12, and 2 Sam. 7.

There are seven basic sections in this book. Consider them this way: 1. Birth and Rule of Samuel (1 Sam. 1-7); 2. Saul’s Reign and Failure (1 Sam. 8-15); 3. David the Courtier (1 Sam. 16-20); 4. David the Fugitive (1 Sam. 21-31); 5. David the King (2 Sam. 1-8); 6. David’s Fall (2 Sam. 9-20); and 7. David’s Final Years and Solomon’s Rise (2 Sam. 21-1 Kings 2).

And remember the ancient literary device called the chiasm, which we will have many opportunities to note in this series of messages.

a Samuel succeeds the elderly Eli and rules (1 Sam. 1-7)
b Saul fails (1 Sam. 8-15)
c David’s rise under Saul (1 Sam. 16-20)
d The Hinge: God reverses the fortunes of Saul and David (1 Sam. 21-31)
c’ David’s rise under God (2 Sam. 1-8)
b’ David fails (2 Sam. 9-20)
a’ Solomon succeeds the elderly David and rules (2 Sam. 21-1 Kings 2)

Church and State

In the period of the judges, the people of Israel were governed by magistrates who were also prophets. In the transition to the monarchy that Samuel objected to, the new constitution separated the office of magistrate from the office of prophet. Samuel was willing to go along with this, provided the king heeded the words of the prophets. This is precisely what Saul would not do, and what David, a man after God’s own heart, was willing to do. It is also worth noting that this division was not watertight—David himself (a king) had the prophetic gift (2 Sam. 23:1), and even Saul had it for a time, much to everyone’s astonishment (1 Sam. 10:11).

In the literature on this book, it is common to see commentators describe this as a transition from a theocracy to a monarchy, but this is not what it was supposed to be at all. There was a separation of branches of their civil order, but there was no thought of any of those branches operating in what we would call a “secular” way. All was to continue under the authority of God. Theocracies are inescapable. Every society has an ultimate authority; every society has a god of their system. Christians must therefore want the God of the society they live to be the true and living God. How could we possibly want anything else?

Rising and Falling

This book is rich with instruction—showing us how God in His providence causes human societies to navigate transitions. These transitions are often brought about by sin and failure, and yet God is not stumped by anything. God draws straight with crooked lines.

Is there a word for us here? Of course—all Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for instruction. We see that the turmoil that Israel was in is comparable in many ways to the turmoil of our own times, and the lack of faithfulness in the Church. Eli does not restrain his sons, and Hannah laments her barrenness. What does God do in situations like that?

Read Full Article

Parish Life

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

Over the years, we have seen many believers move here to the Palouse, and we have been greatly blessed by this. The reasons have obviously varied, but in countless conversations I have been a part of, the word that comes up over and over and over again is the word community. There is a reason for that, and it is a biblical reason.

The Text

“And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from?? house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:42-47).

Summary of the Text

As with many texts of Scripture, there is much more here than we can possibly address. But there is a key theme that we can take away from this passage, and if we do, our love for one another will only flourish and grow. In the aftermath of the great events of Pentecost, the church in Jerusalem was blessed in multiple ways. They continued steadfastly in four things—the apostolic teaching, fellowship, the breaking of bread, and prayers (v. 42). Fellowship is italicized here because that is what we want to focus on this morning. The revival provoked a response of godly fear, and the apostles performed many wonders (v. 43). The believers were knit together by the Spirit, and shared their goods freely, as any had need (vv. 44-45). They continued with one another on a daily basis in the Temple, and from house to house. They were in God’s house, but we also see that God was in their houses. They would
eat together with gladness and singleness of heart (v. 46). They praised the Lord, and the outsiders praised them (v. 47). As a consequence, there were converts on a daily basis (v. 47). When the church catches fire, the world will come to watch it burn—and often the fire will spread to them.

Setting Aside a Distraction

This passage has been grossly abused over the years, with utopians and idealists urging us to adopt some form of communism. But this was an outbreak of sharing, not an outbreak of confiscation. The Spirit enables a man to give. The devil enables a man to see that somebody else isn’t giving enough. When, a few chapters later, Ananias and Sapphira were struck down dead (Acts 5:4), it was for their lie, and not because they hadn’t met the commune’s draconian quotas. There are always liars in the church who, like Ananias and Sapphira, want to look more generous than they actually are. Today this lie in the church is perpetuated by those who confound generosity and the violence of confiscation.

And remember the circumstance. Jesus had taught His disciples that within one generation, real estate prices in Jerusalem were going to approach zero. A number of faithful Christians had thoughtfully begun to liquidate their assets (wouldn’t you?), and they were in a position to use those assets to benefit their brothers and sisters in the great revival.

The Koinonia Blessing

The word here rendered as fellowship is koinonia. It is a remarkable word, encompassing a great deal. It refers, for example, to our partaking of the Lord’s Supper together (1 Cor. 10:16). It refers to coffee and donuts time (Acts 2:46). And it refers to our time together in the rough and tumble of daily covenant life (Philemon 17). Paul argues in a restitution/runaway slave case on the basis of koinonia. As the water flows from Ezekiel’s temple, out into the world, so koinonia fellowship flows out from our worship here, until it inundates your Fourth of July barbeque get togethers.

The worship of God proper occurs on the Lord’s Day here. This is the church. What we do on Monday and Thursday afternoons represents the kingdom. The worship of God at His appointed time, in His appointed manner, is the cathedral. The rest of the week is the surrounding parish.

Strengths and Weaknesses

A number of years ago, we divided our community up into different parishes, naming them after great men in the history of the Reformation. We did this, not because we think that lines on a map create koinonia, but because we wanted to facilitate the flow of that fellowship—we wanted to build channels for it to flow in. Overall, we have been pleased with what has happened as a result of this, but we still have a lot to learn.

Some strengths: We have seen many gifted meals, van-unloading parties, shower gifts, and kirkerbay helps. Some parishes have had a thriving social/governmental experience. Good levels of elder awareness of how folks in their parish are doing. We have seen a lot of pent-up energy for works of service (more than our current structures can accommodate).

Some weaknesses: Attendance at our parish HOH meetings is frequently thin. Some of the first zeal that attended our discovery of psalm-singing is diminished. As new folks come into the church, we have the problem of pre- requisites and “shared assumptions.” We sometimes have seen parish envy (“why can’t our parish…”). Church officers are sometimes stretched thin. We need to do something that will coordinate women’s ministry. More Bible studies would be a blessing.

Three Companions

As we grow, we need to make adjustments. But we do not want to make adjustments just for the sake of making them. Rearranging the furniture is not the same thing as ongoing reformation and revival. The life of the Spirit always brings koinonia, but that life always has three companions—apostolic doctrine, breaking of bread, and prayers. Community, however it is created, is the sort of place where you can go and get propped up by others, making it look like you are more of a player than you are. All of these things are from the hands of the Lord. We rely on Him for them. We cannot generate them ourselves. We must look to Him, and to His means of grace. But this kind of proclamation is one of those means, and so our response should be to simply believe what He says about what He is doing among His people.

Read Full Article

Parenting Young People 2

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

The hardest thing to maintain in this unbalanced world is balance. We react, we pull away, we lurch, and we tumble. We do this in many ways. And, having heard the exhortation that we should teach our children to love the standard and, if they don’t, to lower the standard, what temptation will confront us? The temptation will be to think that laziness and apathy are grace, and that defensiveness when confronted is zeal for the law of God. But loving God with all your mind, soul, heart and strength is a love with balance.

The Text

“Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;) That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Eph. 6:1-4).

Summary of the Text

Here are some of the basics of Christian living within the family. We begin with the duty of obedience (v. 1). When children are young and living at home, honor entails obedience, necessarily. When children are grown and out on their own, the duty of honor remains, but it is rendered differently (Mark 7:10-13). This is obedience rendered by children in the Lord (v. 1). The word for obedience could be rendered literally as listen-under—or, as we might put it, listen up. This attentiveness to what parents say is described here by Paul as a form of honor, and he goes on to describe how much of a blessing it will be to the children who learn how to behave in this way (v. 2). This commandment, to honor parents, is the first commandment with a promise. The promise from God Himself is that things will go well for you throughout your long life on the earth (v. 3). And then fathers are presented with an alternative—one thing is prohibited and another is enjoined. Fathers are told not to exasperate their children to the point of wrath or anger (v. 4), and instead are told to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (v. 4). Note that they are not told to provoke their children to wrath with the nurture and admonition of the Lord —one excludes the other.

Stop Experimenting on Children

In construction work, one of the good things about a concrete pour is that, no matter what, a couple hours later, you’re all done. This is also one of the really bad things about it. You don’t want to start out with a long foundation wall and wind up with a patio.

Kids are a concrete pour. The time they will spend in your home goes past a lot faster than you thought it would. Fathers are tasked with the responsibility of bringing them up in the Lord, which means that fathers are tasked with the responsibility of working in harmony with the nature of the child. It is of course debated what that nature is actually like, and so how are parents to deal with this?

Too many Christian parents are like that old joke about the Harvard man. “You can always tell a Harvard man, but you can’t tell him much.” Because we have successfully established the principle that parents have true authority in the home, many foolish parents have concluded that this means that anything they may happen to think about child-rearing, or education, or training, or courtship standards, is therefore automatically blessed of God. But fathers are told not to provoke their children because, in this fallen world, this is a very easy thing to do. This is a very easy thing for Christian fathers to do. If it had not been an easy temptation for Ephesian fathers, Paul could have saved his advice for somebody who really needed it. Paul does not make the mistake of thinking that authority makes folly impossible—he cautions against authoritative folly.

The hallmark of whether or not a father is experimenting on his kids, as opposed to bringing them up in obedience, is how open he is to the idea of someone else actually measuring what he is doing. How open is he to true accountability? “Not that we dare to classify or compare ourselves with some of those who are commending themselves. But when they measure themselves by one another and compare themselves with one another, they are without understanding” (2 Cor. 10:12). Note that phrase “without understanding.” How can you tell if parents have undertaken their solemn responsibilities as parents with a demeanor of humble confidence? “Let the righteous smite me; it shall be a kindness: and let him reprove me; it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break my head” (Ps. 141:5).

A Road and A Way

The Christian faith is a road, sure enough. But it is also a way. This means that how we walk is as important as where we walk. If someone has questions about what you are doing, it does not answer the concern to point at the road. It does not answer to bring out your books and web sites that argue for this particular kind of asphalt. That’s as may be, but there is something else going on.

How do you conjugate the verb firm? Do you say I am firm, you are stubborn, he is pig-headed? If you do this easily, then you have wandered from the way, whatever road you are on.

Another way of measuring this is by whether or not you require obedience of your children for their sake or not. If you don’t require it, that is selfish. If you demand it for your own reasons, that is selfish. If you require it as a gift to them, then you are modeling the same kind of obedience you are asking for.

And God is Our Father

There is no way for any parent to hear these words without conviction. And conviction is good. But always remember there is a hard-riding guilt that is from the enemy of our souls, and not from the Holy Spirit. Remember that as God is teaching us not to provoke others with impossible standards, He models this for us. He is not provoking us with impossible standards either. Our Father in Heaven requires nothing in this that He does not do Himself. He is the Father of all grace. The one thing to remember about this grace is that He—because He is a loving Father—requires us to freely extend what we have freely received (Matt. 10:8; Col. 3:13).

Read Full Article

KJV 400

Joe Harby on

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Introduction

As you all no doubt have noticed, I preach from the King James Version of the Bible (KJV). This version is also sometimes referred to as the Authorized Version (AV), being authorized by King James I of England. This edition of the Bible came out in 1611, making the year 2011 its 400th birthday. I thought that this would be a suitable occasion for me to explain this particular pulpit oddity of mine. And if anyone does not pay attention to this explanation, what goeth on, he wots not.

The Texts

“What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God” (Rom. 3:1-2).

“But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).

Summary of the Texts

In the Romans text, Paul mentions in passing that one of the privileges that the Jews had was that they had been entrusted with the oracles of God, very plainly referring to the Old Testament Scriptures. In the transition between the covenants, clearly the responsibility for the New Testament would not lie with unbelieving Israel, with the Israel that had rejected and crucified the Messiah. No, the covenant, and all attendant covenantal responsibilities, were transferred over to the Christian Church, the new Israel of God (Gal. 6:16). This church is the church of the living God, and is responsible to support the truth. This would naturally include the repository of all God’s revealed truth—the Scriptures.

Four Basic Issues

There are four basic issues when it comes to selection of a Bible translation, and we will consider each one of them in turn. The first is the one already alluded to—who is responsible for the task of guarding “the oracles of God”? Is the church, or some other entity? The second is which manuscripts are being translated. The third has to do with translation philosophy. And the fourth has to do with intelligibility for the modern reader.

Responsibility

As it currently stands, the decision to release a new translation of the Bible is a decision that is made between academics and businessmen. A corporation or business decides that the market will bear yet another translation, and they sign up experts in the original languages, usually men from the academy. The church is viewed as the target marketing demographic, and is not seen as an entity that has anything whatever to say about the translation or publication of a new Bible. The sure fire sign of this is the fact that new translations are all copyrighted. The KJV is in the public domain.

Manuscripts

The earliest complete manuscripts belong to a different manuscript “family” than do the thousands of later manuscripts which are spread around the ancient world much more broadly, and which were in common use down to the invention of the printing press. Let us call the two basic families the Alexandrian and the Byzantine (sometimes called the textus receptus). The KJV is based on the Byzantine and almost all modern translations are based on the Alexandrian. When we consider it carefully, nothing is more apparent than that this is actually the “battle of the paradigms.” In some respects, this is very much like the reconstruction of the evolutionary fossil tree, 98 percent of which is missing. The Byzantine text type is a very broad river which we can trace to about a century after the narrow river called the Alexandrian.

Two of complete Alexandrian manuscripts are held up as the closest exemplars of what the NT autographs supposedly contained. But they differ between themselves in the Gospels over 3,000 times, and they are about 300 years after the autographs. To applaud them therefore as the “most reliable” means that reliability is an elastic term. This means scholars are not really submitting to the authority of the Alexandrian texts, but rather are using them to overthrow any idea of a settled textual authority. This gives them room to speculate in a scholarly way.

Dynamic or Formal

Suppose we agree on which manuscript family we translate from. There is still quite a bit of diversity possible. Translations can range from very strict, and formal, trying to reproduce the original wording as much as possible, or they can be very breezy. This debate is between the school of dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence. There is a spectrum on this of course, but here is a drastic example:

“Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful” (Ps. 1:1, KJV).
“How well God must like you—you don’t hang out at Sin Saloon, you don’t slink along Dead-End Road, you don’t go to Smart-Mouth College” (Ps. 1:1, The Message)

Thees and Thous

This is the one place where the KJV lies at a disadvantage. There are many archaic words and expressions which are widely misunderstood. For example, we see many people, even today, who believe that thees and thous are pronouns for talking to God—as though they were spiritual talk. But thou is actually singular, while you is plural.

At the same time, for those who want to write ably and well, ignorance of the cadences of the KJV is no more reasonable than ignorance of Shakespeare.

Recommendations

So as you are choosing a Bible, I would recommend that you limit your choices to these. And I recommend you grade them accordingly.

Let’s look at four translations, and give each of them four grades, for responsibility, manuscript, translation, and readability respectively. The KJV would A, A, A, and C. The NKJV would get F, A, B, and A. The ESV would get F, C, B, and A. And the NASB would get F, C, B, and B.

At the same time, don’t fret about all this. Trust God in two respects. The first area is that if God providentially preserved His Word throughout all history, as the Westminster Confession puts it, He didn’t quit preserving it in our day. So don’t worry about the Bible. And secondly, trust God by actually reading your Bibles. This issue must not be an academic one for you—as in, what translation of the Bible is sitting untouched on your shelf?

Read Full Article