Steven Avery
Administrator
Kent Brandenburg
"Wilkerson was picking something up that already existed. There are definitely two sides, two branches, two streams, however you want to put it."
We can talk about metaphors, but "two streams" as defined by Wilkinson was very specific. And today it is invariably accompanied by charts, one is called the Hark Chart, which places the Old Latin on the good stream and the Vulgate on the polluted stream. While there are other many other problems with the chart, this is the one that really cries out "worthless!".
You can see the genesis of the theory:
Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930)
Benjamin. George Wilkinson (1872-1968)
https://books.google.com/books?id=CDuVBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT15
https://archive.org/details/doctrine-bible-benjamin-g-wilkinson-our-authorized-bible-vindicated-01
"Fundamentally, there are only two streams of Bibles"
And you can see the Wilkinson defense of the theory:
=================
Answers to Objections
A Reply to the "Review" of my Book
"Our Authorized Bible Vindicated"
Benjamin. George Wilkinson
https://books.google.com/books?id=SxgnDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT229
I also proved, historically, in the same chapter, that the Waldensian Bible was from the Textus Receptus. Now the Spirit of Prophecy says that the Waldensian Bible was of apostolic origin, uncorrupted, entire, and teaching apostolic Christianity. The Reformation adopted the Textus Receptus; the Jesuit counter-Reformation adopted the Vaticanus. .... The Spirit of Prophecy endorses this line of reasoning. I gave in my book, (page 42) that quotation from Sister White which shows that the Waldenses possessed a Bible which came from apostolic days, was entire, was unadulterated and was ever sought by the fury of the papists to be corrupted. The Spirit of Prophecy, however, tells us that angels restrained their malignant hatred and their efforts to bury the Waldensian Bible under a mass of error and superstition.
=================
You see, this more than over-simplified, actually false, representation of textual history, was intrinsically a part of the Spirit of Prophecy (Ellen G. White) error about the Waldensian Bible.
=================
And I have a page on all this here:
Pure Bible Forum
two lines - two streams - two trees
https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/two-lines-two-streams-two-trees.73/
=================
Here Bryan Ross helped bring this understanding to the AV defender mainstream.
The Two Streams of Bibles Model of Transmission: Its Origins & Accuracy (2019)
Bryan Ross
http://gracelifebiblechurch.com/wp-...bles-Model-of-Transmission-Complete-Notes.pdf
In the Pure Bible Facebook Group, I was able to interact with researcher Steven Avery. As it turned out, Avery also had misgivings about the “two streams of Bibles” model but for different reasons. Instead of questioning the paradigm via the Gothic and Peshitta translations as I had, Avery’s doubts were primarily centered around what he perceived to be false dichotomy between the Old Latin and Latin Vulgate. Moreover, Avery also expressed misgivings regarding Benjamin Wilkinson, the fountainhead of the “two streams” notion and his ties to 7th Day Adventism.
=================
This might explain why Rick Norris and Mark Ward, terrible writers on their own account, are able to follow the Doug Kutilek lead and point out obvious and blatant errors from AV defenders.
btw, I am far more sympathetic to Adventists than many of our Baptist and Reformed TR & AV defenders. Personally, I have had good contacts with their health retreats over the years, and understand their sabbath position. And I believe Wilkinson was brave in what he wrote on the Authorized Version, and a bit of a pioneer.
However, showing the falsity of his two streams position, and explaining how it arose out of Adventist error, is simply a reasonable service. Too many AV defenders have tripped themselves up following this rabbit trail of the charts.
Maybe there is a way to rehabilitate "Two Streams" theory on the NT, but it is difficult with so much misinformation around.
Steven Avery
"Wilkerson was picking something up that already existed. There are definitely two sides, two branches, two streams, however you want to put it."
We can talk about metaphors, but "two streams" as defined by Wilkinson was very specific. And today it is invariably accompanied by charts, one is called the Hark Chart, which places the Old Latin on the good stream and the Vulgate on the polluted stream. While there are other many other problems with the chart, this is the one that really cries out "worthless!".
You can see the genesis of the theory:
Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930)
Benjamin. George Wilkinson (1872-1968)
https://books.google.com/books?id=CDuVBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT15
https://archive.org/details/doctrine-bible-benjamin-g-wilkinson-our-authorized-bible-vindicated-01
"Fundamentally, there are only two streams of Bibles"
And you can see the Wilkinson defense of the theory:
=================
Answers to Objections
A Reply to the "Review" of my Book
"Our Authorized Bible Vindicated"
Benjamin. George Wilkinson
https://books.google.com/books?id=SxgnDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT229
I also proved, historically, in the same chapter, that the Waldensian Bible was from the Textus Receptus. Now the Spirit of Prophecy says that the Waldensian Bible was of apostolic origin, uncorrupted, entire, and teaching apostolic Christianity. The Reformation adopted the Textus Receptus; the Jesuit counter-Reformation adopted the Vaticanus. .... The Spirit of Prophecy endorses this line of reasoning. I gave in my book, (page 42) that quotation from Sister White which shows that the Waldenses possessed a Bible which came from apostolic days, was entire, was unadulterated and was ever sought by the fury of the papists to be corrupted. The Spirit of Prophecy, however, tells us that angels restrained their malignant hatred and their efforts to bury the Waldensian Bible under a mass of error and superstition.
=================
You see, this more than over-simplified, actually false, representation of textual history, was intrinsically a part of the Spirit of Prophecy (Ellen G. White) error about the Waldensian Bible.
=================
And I have a page on all this here:
Pure Bible Forum
two lines - two streams - two trees
https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/two-lines-two-streams-two-trees.73/
=================
Here Bryan Ross helped bring this understanding to the AV defender mainstream.
The Two Streams of Bibles Model of Transmission: Its Origins & Accuracy (2019)
Bryan Ross
http://gracelifebiblechurch.com/wp-...bles-Model-of-Transmission-Complete-Notes.pdf
In the Pure Bible Facebook Group, I was able to interact with researcher Steven Avery. As it turned out, Avery also had misgivings about the “two streams of Bibles” model but for different reasons. Instead of questioning the paradigm via the Gothic and Peshitta translations as I had, Avery’s doubts were primarily centered around what he perceived to be false dichotomy between the Old Latin and Latin Vulgate. Moreover, Avery also expressed misgivings regarding Benjamin Wilkinson, the fountainhead of the “two streams” notion and his ties to 7th Day Adventism.
=================
This might explain why Rick Norris and Mark Ward, terrible writers on their own account, are able to follow the Doug Kutilek lead and point out obvious and blatant errors from AV defenders.
btw, I am far more sympathetic to Adventists than many of our Baptist and Reformed TR & AV defenders. Personally, I have had good contacts with their health retreats over the years, and understand their sabbath position. And I believe Wilkinson was brave in what he wrote on the Authorized Version, and a bit of a pioneer.
However, showing the falsity of his two streams position, and explaining how it arose out of Adventist error, is simply a reasonable service. Too many AV defenders have tripped themselves up following this rabbit trail of the charts.
Maybe there is a way to rehabilitate "Two Streams" theory on the NT, but it is difficult with so much misinformation around.
Steven Avery