Shoes or Sandals?
Here are the texts under consideration:
One of the favorite texts to point out a contradiction in the Word of God is Matthew 10:10, Mark 6:9, and Luke 10:4. It appears that in Mark 6:9 Jesus told them to wear sandals, and in Matthew and Luke He told them not to wear them. The truth is clear in the KJV and any Greek text.
I was sitting in on a New Testament Survey class at BIOLA University one day in the 70s, and a new PhD was making his debut and trashing the Word of God. He had just been off to Edinburgh, Scotland, to a wonderful Seminary there to get ready to join the scholar's union at BIOLA. He spent four years and thousands of dollars to learn how to trash the Bible and prove it had errors. In 20 minutes flat, across the street in the seminary library, I learned the following. Save yourself a lot of cash and a lot of eating crow-- Just study your Bible WITHOUT the help of the scholar's union.
Once again, when you meddle with God's Word, he meddles with your mind.
(1) Both the Textus Receptus and Nestle's Greek agree on the two Greek words.
(2) HUPERDEMA is a shoe to cover the foot, possibly over the sandals as well. Cf- Matt. 13:11 implies it was carried to use at the destination-- a sort of dress shoe. Acts 13:25 implies it was strapped on. Mark 1:7 & Luke 3:16 indicate it had a latchet. So, this is the nicer dress shoe of Jesus era.
(3) SANDALION is a basic sandal for traveling, a simple foot pad, sometimes tied on. Thus, sandals were required in Mark 6:9. Dress shoes were forbidden in Matthew and Luke This would be the Nike walking or traveling shoe of today, while the HUPERDEMA would be the wing tips into which you changed before the meeting where you were to appear.
(4) The KJV gives the clear and NON-contradictory distinction of two kinds of foot wear. There is no contradiction! Any "scholar" with a pair of wing tips should be able to get this one.
(5) The NIV provides the Edinburgh and Dallas Seminary textual critics with a grand case for a contradiction.
(6) The NASB damns itself, showing that it knows the distinction, but it plans to muddy the waters. So much for the claim that the NASB is more true to the Greek than other recent versions. It makes even more certain that the alleged contradiction is not answerable.
(7) Ken Taylor, trying to correct the "contradiction," shows that he believes there is an error. This serves the critics very well. They can claim his correction of the Bible as highly incriminating proof that it was needed.
The NKJV makes all three the same, so it points to a contradiction in the text.
Again, make a jerk and a fool of yourself if you like-- Just get a load of scholarship, an NIV, and a proud look. Trash a few Bible texts, then go around to some old hill Billy who loves the old King James, and that old fella will gladly rub your ever lovin' nose in it.
Presented by: Pastor Steve Van Nattan