In the Old Testament there is a man whose name (Agur) means a "collector of wise sayings" (Prov. 30:1). You will notice that the preacher who "sought
to find out acceptable words" (Ecc. 12:10) no sooner found out "that which was written was upright, even words of truth" (notice the plural: Ecc.
12:10), than the Scholar's Union transvested him into a "scholar" (see NKJV, Eec. 12:10), whereas the Holy Scriptures had him listed as a
You'd better think about that two or three years before you buy an NIVor NASV; they both converted the "preacher" in-. to a teacher. They got rid of
the pastor in the local church who was preaching a Bible, and replaced him with one of their own faculty members who didn't believe THE WORDS (see
Eec. 12:10, 11) were God's words. The context, by the way, was "many books" (Eec. 12:12).
You see, a Bible scholar would have to spend time in the Bible in order to master his subject—the Bible. This would automatically disqualify ninety
percent of the members of every translating committee for English Bibles since 1800. They didn't spend their time in the Bible; they spent it with
Hebrew and Greek "word studies," Hebrew and Greek lexicons, the critical theories of Bible-rejecting philosophers, scientists, "manuscript
detectives," and pro-Catholic "theorizers." Research into Baur's Historiche Grammatik Der Hebraischen Sprache, Moulton and Milligan's The Vocabulary
of the Greek New Testament, F. F. Bruce's The Books and the Parchments, F. M. Cross' The Ancient Library of Qumran, F. G. Kenyon's Our Bible and
Ancient Manuscripts, or G. R. Driver's Semitic Writing, from Pictograph to Alphabet is not BIBLE study. If scholars are present they are NOT "Bible"
Research and collation are the outstanding marks of the real scholar in any field. The trick, when buying books, is to find the men who have done the
most research and collated the most material and then use this material. This way you can save thousands of dollars in building a library. When it
comes to the Bible itself, no man has to buy more than eighty books to learn everything about the Book that anyone ever found out (or probably ever
will find out) up to the Rapture. "You can borrow brains but you can't borrow character," hence we can borrow material from the world's greatest
scholars who often had no intelligence at all when it came to Biblical truth. Scholars can research, experiment, theorize, test, analyize, and record
till they are blue in the face, but if they are not born again (1 Cor. 3) the Book says they will be "Ever learning, and never able to come to the
knowledge of the truth."
The ability to gather facts is not the ability to interpret facts. The ability to collect details is not the ability to relate them correctly. The
ability to analyize Greek and Hebrew words, to take them apart, construct them, trace their origins and roots, and relate them to other languages is
not the ability, to understand the Author of speech, or even what the Author of speech SAID (2 Pet. 1:21). . Etymological "know-how" is not
soul-winning know-how (see p. 121). A "sense of history" doesn't mean the author has any common sense, and a knowledge of Biblical languages doesn't
mean the scholar can grasp one fundamental truth in sixty-six books where it contradicts his opinions or beliefs. Ezekiel 14 and 2 Thessalonians 2
assure us that not even the seeker after the truth, or the inquirer after facts, can find either if a wrong heart condition exists that God knows
about (Ezek. 14:1-12). Since there is not one "recognized" scholar who ever lived who acknowledged this Biblical truth—it contradicts their opinions
and beliefs—you may assume that ninety-five percent of the intellectuals who professed to be "Biblical" scholars were nothing but deluded
Years ago (1950) John R. Rice used to preach a sermon called The Seven-Fold Sin of Not Winning Souls to Christ. One point that he made was that in
view of Proverbs 11:30, a man who didn't win souls to Christ was a "short-sighted fool."
Did you ever think how that sermon would have struck the Christian scholars between 1800 and 1990 who produced all the modern trash (NW, NASV, ASV,
RSV, NRSV, RV, NKJV) that is on the market today? "A short-sighted fool?" Isn't that some way to talk about Zane Hodges, Millar Burrows, Wilbur
Pickering, Reuben Olson, Bob Jones IV, Arthur Farstad, Kurt Aland, and Bruce Metzger? "A short-sighted fool!" What was Rice's authority for calling
the greatest Christian intellects of the twentieth century "short-sighted fools"? My, how rude of " good, godly, kind, Dr. John!" Do you know who this
would have included if it were so? B. M. Metzger, H. Von Soden, Eberhard and Erwin Nestle, Fred Afman, James Price, R. M. Grant, Kenneth Wuest, Wilbur
Pickering, Philip Schaff and all of their friends and associates.
How does a brilliant Christian intellectual who majored in "Biblical scholarship" wind up as a "short-sighted fool"?
Easy; he pretends that Proverbs 11:30 was either written for someone else or else it was written wrongly. (See the RSV for the latter viewpoint). John
R. Rice further said that if a scholar was not winning souls to Christ he was not following Christ (Matt. 4:19). And if that weren't enough, he said
the scholar was guilty of spiritual manslaughter (Ezek. 3). How did John R. Rice (who professed to be a "scholar") ever draw such a judgment on A.
Harnack, Gerhard Strauss, F. F. Bruce, Ronald Walker, Dick Melton, Doug Kutilek, Robert Sumner, Gary Hudson, E. J. Bultmann, G. W. Anderson, MacRae,
Newman, Professor Nida, and the NW and NASV committees? What peculiar standard was John Rice judging "godly" Christian scholarship by? He was judging
it by a King James Authorized Version (1611).
If he was right, would you follow any intellectual—of any degree, or any ability—knowing he was a fool with blood on his hands, because he was not
following Jesus Christ? I trow not.
You see, from a Biblical standpoint—and all the men above were "recognized Biblical scholars"—scholarship and scholars are not essential things at
all; they are not even valuable. Their value depends only on the amount of material they accumulate that is SO, and what can be done with this
material to improve the living conditions, or the dying conditions, of their fellow men. If the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia cannot help
a man live closer to Jesus Christ than he does, and cannot prepare him for death and the Judgment Seat of Christ in better condition than he would
have been without it, it is from a Biblical standpoint—shall we dare say, the word?—WORTHLESS. The fact that it took twenty-three years to
complete and it contains the accumulated works and researches of seven hundred qualified authorities doesn't "do the job" from a Biblical standpoint
if it doesn't cause the salvation of sinners, the edification of the saints, and the magnification of the words of God (Psa. 138:2, Acts 13:48). The
Bible has its own standards 'of "scholarship." It also has a great deal to say about scholars (Luke!!; Isa. 28, 29; Psa. 119; Ecc. 12; 1 Cor. 1-3, and
Prov. 1, 9, 10, 13, 15, 22, 24, and 29).
For the Ending Continue to the next thread
edit on 8-7-2018 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)