[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

The Niagara Bible Conference (1878) was actually a turning point towards textual apostasy and away from the true Reformation 'fundamentalist' view of the Bible.

Ed Pfenninger describes this dynamic well, note he adds a bit of emphasis, and commentary in parenthesis, within the Westminster Confession:

===========================================

http://home.houston.rr.com/pfenninger/ins-web2.htm
INSPIRATION: TRUE AND FALSE

As the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 states:

“The Old Testament in Hebrew (which is the native language of the people of God of old) and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations) being immediately inspired by God and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages are therefore authentical .”

Thus, the idea that the Scriptures were not perfectly preserved by the Providence of God would have been thought ridiculous to Christians before the 19th century. It wasn’t until the 1880’s that the “Autographs Only” idea began to gain adherents among scholars.

As Dr. James H. Sightler notes in A Testimony Founded For Ever:

“The Princeton Theologians Archibald Alexander Hodge and Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, in 1881, were the first to claim inspiration for the original autographs only and to exchange the doctrine of providential preservation for restoration of the text by critics…Actually it was Warfield’s teacher and predecessor at Princeton, Charles Hodge, …who was the first to take up naturalistic text criticism and abandon the doctrine of providential preservation. It (was) the Niagara Creed of 1878 adopted at the Niagara Conference on Prophecy, which was dominated by a coalition of Princeton graduates and followers of J. N. Darby, (that) may well have been the first document to claim inspiration for every word of scripture provided such word is found in the original manuscripts.”

Yet, as we shall see, the “Autograph Only” school’s only purpose was to undermine confidence in the King James Bible.

“Original autographs has proved itself to be a term with a mission and that mission is the destruction of the Textus Receptus which after more than a century of attack still carries majestically on far superior to any of its rivals”

================================================== ========

There is more on the web-page. This is a fundamental issue, and Ed Pfenninger, quoting James Sightler, describes the situation with historical precision, combined with simplicity and flair.

One minor point of study, I am not so sure that Charles Hodge, father of Alexander Hodge, was particularly supportive of naturalistic textual criticism (based on my limited studies).

And there was a widespread rebellious counter-Reformation textual movement that involved a number of men whose names will be pleasantly forgotten for the moment. They were busily looking for angles against the pure Bible and moving towards the alexandrian cult errant text (the skeptics duckshoot text). The fabricated new text was so error-laden and corrupt that the faulty text itself impelled the 'original autographs' surrender, the route disguised as a victory led by Warfield and Hodge.

(Warfield, incidentally, did not really believe in the purity and perfection of the 'original autographs' despite that being the common claim, he left plenty of room for errors there as well with crafty wording and maneuvering.)

Shalom,
Steven