Should We Update WCF 1:8 So It Reflects the Text-critical Theory of the ESV?

Brett Mahlen

Westminster Confession of Faith 1:8 affirms that the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament are inspired by God, and it also says God has kept his word pure in all ages. “All ages” includes the 1640s and the 2020s, by the way:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was 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; so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner; and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

The ESV doesn’t seem to share that same confidence in the Greek and Hebrew because it allows the Septuagint to correct the Masoretic Text 277 times, and also the Dead Sea Scrolls to correct the Masoretic Text 18 times (John Owen and the Traditional Protestant View of the Hebrew Old Testament — Southern Equip).

Simply look at the ESV in Deuteronomy 32:8 and you’ll see that the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint’s “God” correct the Masoretic Text’s “Israel.” In Deuteronomy 33:2, and you see that the reading “us”, found in the Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate, corrects the Mastoretic “them.” In Deuteronomy 33:8, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint fill in “Give to Levi” which was lacking in the Masoretic Text. Other examples abound!

If we no longer believe the Hebrew Masoretic Text has been kept pure and if we believe it can be corrected by other versions, maybe we should use the ESV to correct WCF 1:8 just like the other versions correct the original Greek and Hebrew. I would propose the following as an update that is faithful to the ESV’s method, with a line through the old, and what is new gets underlined:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was 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 only in the autographs, and, by his singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical, but later, in the Old Testament, was corrupted by the Masoretes and other Jews, are to be treated as witnesses to the autographs, and may be corrected by other witnesses, including but not limited to the Latin Vulgate, the Greek versions (often called Septuagint), the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Ugaritic, and other relevant versions, languages, and witnesses; the original autographs of the New Testament were lost and the New Testament was corrupted by the Orthodox church so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them a plurality of witnesses in many languages. But, because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word witnesses of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner; and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

Here is a clean version, without lines through and underlines, as it would read:

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was 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 only in the autographs, but later, in the Old Testament, was corrupted by the Masoretes and other Jews, are to be treated as witnesses to the autographs, and may be corrected by other witnesses, including but not limited to the Latin Vulgate, the Greek versions (often called Septuagint), the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Ugaritic, and other relevant versions, languages, and witnesses; the original autographs of the New Testament were lost and the New Testament was corrupted by the Orthodox church so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto a plurality of witnesses in many languages. But, because these tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have right unto and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the witnesses of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner; and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.

Anyone who reads the footnotes of his ESV (or any other recently published Bible) will see that this is the philosophy of the ESV translators. Modern evangelicals who use the ESV seem to agree more with Article X of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy than the original intent of Westminster Confession 1:8. The Chicago Statement says in Article X:

We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy. We further affirm that copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original.

I end with Turretin and Heidegger’s Helvetic Consensus of 1675, for comparison with the philosophy of the ESV and the Chicago Statement (underline, mine):

Canon II: But, in particular, The Hebrew original of the OT which we have received and to this day do retain as handed down by the Hebrew Church, “who had been given the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2), is, not only in its consonants, but in its vowels either the vowel points themselves, or at least the power of the points not only in its matter, but in its words, inspired by God. It thus forms, together with the Original of the NT the sole and complete rule of our faith and practice; and to its standard, as to a Lydian stone, all extant versions, eastern or western, ought to be applied, and wherever they differ, be conformed.

Canon III: Therefore, we are not able to approve of the opinion of those who believe that the text which the Hebrew Original exhibits was determined by man’s will alone, and do not hesitate at all to remodel a Hebrew reading which they consider unsuitable, and amend it from the versions of the LXX and other Greek versions, the Samaritan Pentateuch, by the Chaldaic Targums, or even from other sources. They go even to the point of following the corrections that their own rational powers dictate from the various readings of the Hebrew Original itself which, they maintain, has been corrupted in various ways; and finally, they affirm that besides the Hebrew edition of the present time, there are in the versions of the ancient interpreters which differ from our Hebrew text, other Hebrew Originals. Since these versions are also indicative of ancient Hebrew Originals differing from each other, they thus bring the foundation of our faith and its sacred authority into perilous danger.

Of course, I do not want to see any of the Reformation confessions revised. A much better course would be simply to recover their original meaning, which is implicit in the Westminster Standards, and explicit in the Helvetic Consensus.