Introduction to the Doctrine
of Verbal Plenary Preservation
Lesson 1
|
I. |
DEFINITION OF VPP
What does VPP mean?
“Verbal” means “every word to the jot and tittle” (Ps
12:6-7, Matt 5:18). “Plenary” means “the Scripture as a
whole with all the words intact” (Matt 24:35, 1 Pet 1:25).
So VPP means the whole of Scripture with all its words even
to the jot and tittle is perfectly preserved by God without
any loss of the original words, prophecies, promises,
commandments, doctrines, and truths, not only in the words
of salvation, but also the words of history, geography and
science. Every book, every chapter, every verse, every word,
every syllable, every letter is infallibly preserved by the
Lord Himself to the last iota. |
|
II. |
THE
BEGINNINGS OF VPP ISSUE IN SINGAPORE
|
A. |
Two Deadly Poisons:
‘From The Mind of God to the Mind of Man’ and ‘One
Bible Only?’
|
1. |
The battle
to be fought today is the battle for the
Bible. The doctrine of inspiration was
fought in the last century. In this new
century, it is the battle of the doctrine of
Bible preservation. Far Eastern Bible
College of Singapore stood firm on God’s
providential preservation of the perfect
Bible and is still standing today without
compromise and apology.
|
|
2. |
The book
‘From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man’
published by Bob Jones University in 1999
attacks the fundamental doctrine of Bible
preservation by having an inclination to the
critical texts originated from Westcott and
Hort. In addition, BJU adopts a neutral
position on the English Bible versions. This
is the first poison that spreads to all who
adore BJU as one Bible seminary and
university that stood without apology
through the dangerous time of great
apostasy. Unfortunately, like many other
Bible seminaries which had fallen, BJU
succumbed to the god of humanistic
scholarship and downgraded spiritual and
biblical discernment. Thus, FEBC, being true
to her call to be God’s watchman in these
last of the last days, must sound the alarm
bell of warning.
|
|
3. |
The second
poison is found in the book ‘One Bible
Only?’ which was written by the Baptist
fundamentalists who taught at Central
Baptist Theological Seminary of Plymouth,
Minnesota. This book speaks in one voice
throughout saying that the Bible is
preserved conceptually, and not verbally. In
other words, it was believed that only the
vital doctrines are preserved, and not the
inspired words. Many of the non-VPPists or
anti-VPPists sing the same tune as this
book. Their arguments against the doctrine
of VPP are relatively the same. |
|
|
B. |
Life BPC & FEBC
|
1. |
Dr Jeffrey
Khoo, the Academic Dean of FEBC, wrote two
separate critiques against the two poison
books which were highly endorsed by BJU and
Central Baptist Seminary, in order to defend
the King James Bible and the original
language texts underlying it. His timely
critiques serve as a strong warning to the
readers of these books. The teaching of the
doctrine of VPP has thus taken root and
eventually became the hot topic among B-P
churches in Singapore.
|
|
2. |
Among the
teaching faculty members of FEBC, two
disagreed on the doctrine of VPP. As a
result, they resigned from the faculty but
remained as assistant pastors of Life BPC.
Due to their influence and good support from
the Church Session, Life BPC steered a
different direction from FEBC. Since then,
anti-VPP statements were consistently made
and taught that VPP is a new teaching and
remains a personal conviction rather than a
universal gospel truth.
|
|
3. |
Thus, Life
BPC and FEBC went on separate ways from the
last quarter of 2003 onwards. In the same
year, FEBC Principal Rev Timothy Tow
resigned from Life BPC as pastor and started
a new church called ‘True Life BPC’ under
the umbrella of FEBC. |
|
|
C. |
Calvary BPC & Truth
BPC
‘Truth will out’ is what Rev Timothy Tow always
reminded his students in FEBC. The issue of VPP did
not remain with Life-FEBC. For more than two years,
Calvary BPC has been staying clear of this sensitive
issue for fear of splitting the church. It was until
2 Oct 2005, an official church stand was made for a
non-VPP position, though not without a strong appeal
made to the Board of Elders against making such a
hasty decision. As a result, five deacons and two
full-time staffworkers, unwilling to submit to a
non-VPP stand, resigned from their offices at the
end of the year 2005. It was in such a situation,
Truth BPC was born on 1 Jan 2006 at Calvary Pandan
BPC premises to take a firm stand on the doctrine of
VPP. “For we can do nothing against the truth but
for the truth” (2 Cor 13:8). |
|
|
III. |
THE
IMPORTANCE OF VPP
|
A. |
Inspiration and
Preservation are Twin Brothers!
|
1. |
Non-VPPists
or anti-VPPists do not believe the God who
perfectly inspired His Word has also
perfectly preserved His Word. They affirm
Verbal Plenary Inspiration (VPI) but deny
Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP). They
believe strongly that we do not have an
infallible and inerrant Bible TODAY and
thereby their denial of the doctrine of VPP.
By denying VPP, they might as well deny VPI,
for what is the use of an infallible and
inerrant Bible in the past but not today?
|
|
2. |
Dr Ian
Paisley was absolutely correct to say, “The
verbal Inspiration of the Scriptures demands
the verbal Preservation of the Scriptures.
Those who would deny the need for verbal
Preservation cannot be accepted as committed
to verbal Inspiration. If there is no
preserved Word of God today then the work of
Divine Revelation and Divine Inspiration has
perished” (My Plea for the Old Sword,
103).
|
|
3. |
Dr Timothy
Tow, founding pastor of the
Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore and
principal of the Far Eastern Bible College,
likewise wrote, “We believe the preservation
of Holy Scripture and its Divine inspiration
stand in the same position as providence and
creation. If Deism teaches a Creator who
goes to sleep after creating the world is
absurd, to hold to the doctrine of
inspiration without preservation is equally
illogical. … Without preservation, all the
inspiration, God-breathing into the
Scriptures, would be lost. But we have a
Bible so pure and powerful in every word and
it is so because God has preserved it down
through the ages” (A Theology for Every
Christian: Knowing God and His Word,
47).
|
|
4. |
Dr Hills
wrote, “If the doctrine of divine
inspiration of the Old and New Testament
Scriptures is a true doctrine, the doctrine
of the providential preservation of
these Scriptures must also be a true
doctrine. It must be that down through the
centuries God has exercised a special,
providential control over the copying of the
Scriptures and the preservation and use of
the original text have been available to
God's people in every age. God must have
done this, for if He gave the Scriptures to
His Church by inspiration as the perfect and
final revelation of His will, then it is
obvious that He would not allow this
revelation to disappear or undergo any
alteration of its fundamental character” (The
King James Version Defended, 2). |
|
|
B. |
The Doctrine of
Bible Preservation is not a New Teaching!
|
1. |
The
doctrine of the 100% inspiration and 100%
preservation of God’s Holy Word existed even
before the Westminster Confession as much as
the doctrine of the 100% deity and 100%
humanity of Christ existed before the
Athanasian Creed. The doctrine of 100%
inspiration and 100% preservation of God’s
words in the Holy Scriptures is not a new
doctrine but a very old one. It certainly
did not begin with D A Waite, nor E F Hills,
nor J W Burgon, but with the Holy Scripture
itself.
|
|
2. |
The
doctrine of preservation is as old as the
Bible. Why is the Bible our Supreme, Final,
and All-sufficient Authority in faith and
life? It is precisely because it is God’s
Perfect Word, infallible and inerrant, even
today! |
|
|
C. |
The Doctrine of VPP
is Biblical!
|
1. |
The
Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF)
states very clearly that the inspired
Scriptures in the original languages are by
God’s “singular care and providence, kept
pure in all ages” (WCF I:8). The Westminster
divines used Matthew 5:18 as a proof text
for this affirmation of the verbal plenary
preservation (VPP) of the Scriptures. This
proves that the doctrine of the VPP of
Scripture is not just creedal, but more
importantly Biblical.
|
|
2. |
The VPP of
Scripture is a position of faith that is
based solely on the Word of God. “Now
faith is the substance of things hoped for,
the evidence of things not seen” (Heb
11:1). “So then faith cometh by hearing,
and hearing by the word of God” (Rom
10:17). “But without faith it is
impossible to please him: for he that cometh
to God must believe that he is, and that he
is a rewarder of them that diligently seek
him” (Heb 11:6). It is a position that
we must take if we are to weather and
survive the onslaughts of postmodernism,
pop-modernism, open-theism and neo-deism
that seek to destroy the church today. |
|
|
D. |
What Kind of Bible
Preservation?
|
1. |
Many
including non-VPPists say they believe in
providential preservation. This is what they
say, but what do they really mean?
Non-VPPist will tell you he believes in
preservation, however he does not mean
entire preservation but essential
preservation; it is conceptual preservation,
not verbal preservation. In other words, he
believes that only the vital doctrines are
preserved and not the inspired words.
|
|
2. |
Does the
Bible teach partial and conceptual
preservation or plenary and verbal
preservation? The Bible and the Protestant
Church creeds affirm the latter. The
Reformed Confessions in both Presbyterian
and Baptist circles affirm not just the 100%
inspiration of the Autographs, but also the
100% preservation of the Autographs in the
faithful Apographsthat have come down to us
today.
|
|
3. |
The
Westminster Confession of Faith (1.8) for
instance states, “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.” Note that the Westminster
Confession did not use the term “Autographs”
but spoke of the Scriptures in terms of the
original languages (Hebrew OT and Greek NT).
The Westminster Confession clearly affirms
the 100% inspiration (“immediately inspired
by God”) and 100% preservation (“by His
singular care and providence, kept pure
inall ages”) of the Holy Scriptures in the
original languages. |
|
|
E. |
What and Where are
the Preserved Texts Today?
|
1. |
They are
the inspired OT Hebrew words and NT Greek
words the prophets, the apostles, the church
fathers, the reformers used which are today
found in the long and continuously abiding
and preserved words underlying the
Reformation Bibles best represented by the
time-tested and time-honoured KJV, and
NOT in the corrupted Alexandrian
manuscripts and critical Westcott-Hort texts
underlying the liberal, ecumenical, and
neo-evangelical modern English versions.
|
|
2. |
To be more
precise, the infallible and inerrant words
of Scripture are found in the faithfully
preserved Traditional/Byzantine/Majority
manuscripts, and fully represented in the
Printed and Received Text (or Textus
Receptus) that underlie the Reformation
Bibles best represented by the KJV, and
NOT in the corrupted and rejected texts
of Westcott and Hort that underlie the many
modern versions of the English Bible like
the NIV, NASV, ESV, RSV,TEV, CEV, etc. |
|
|
F. |
Are there Scribal/
Copyist Mistakes?
|
1. |
We do not
deny that copying mistakes were made during
the transcription process, but that does not
negate the fact that God has superintended
the transcription of His inspired words to
ensure that none of His inspired words would
be lost. If 10 scribes were copying the
Scriptures, one or two might possibly make a
mistake in copying a particular verse, but
the rest would have copied it correctly, and
the mistake made is easily identified and
rectified by the rest. The special
providential hand of God has ensured this.
|
|
2. |
God’s
providential work is always supernatural.
God knows all things and is all-powerful.
Man makes mistakes, but not God. He who has
inspired every jot and tittle of HisWord has
surely preserved every jot and tittle of His
Word (Matt 5:18).
|
|
3. |
There are
no mistakes in the Bible. If there are any
“discrepancies” in the Bible, the
“discrepancies” are only seeming or
apparent, NOT real or actual. Any
inability to understand or explain such
difficult passages in no way negates the
infallibility and inerrancy of the
Scriptures, applying the faithful Pauline
principle of biblicalinterpretation: “
let God be true, but every man a liar”
(Rom 3:4). |
|
|
G. |
Is KJV Inspired?
|
1. |
Anti-VPPists are prone to put words into the
mouths of VPP proponents by saying that they
believe the KJV to be as inspired and as
infallible and inerrant as the original
language Scriptures. We make no such claim.
We believe that “the King James Version (or
Authorised Version) of the English Bible is
a true, faithful, and accurate
translation of these two providentially
preserved Texts [Traditional Masoretic
Hebrew Text and Traditional Greek Text
underlying the KJV], which in our time has
no equal among all of the other English
Translations. The translators did such a
fine job in their translation task that we
can without apology hold up the Authorised
Version and say ‘This is the Word of God!’
while at the same time realising that, in
some verses, we must go back to the
underlying original language Texts for
complete clarity, and also compare Scripture
with Scripture” (The Dean Burgon Society,
“Articles of Faith,” section II.A).
|
|
2. |
‘No
translation can claim to be 100% equivalent
to the original language Scriptures, but if
it is a true, faithful, accurate translation
based on the preserved text, it is the Word
of God. The Textus Receptus is like the
platinum yardstick of the Smithsonian
Institute, accurate to the last decimal
point. The KJV on the other hand is like the
wooden yardstick used in the homes and
shops. Would anyone deny that the common
yardstick though not the perfect yardstick
of the Smithsonian Institute is any less a
yardstick and fit to measure?’ (Dr Jeffrey
Khoo, The Emergence of
Neo-Fundamentalism: One Bible Only? Or Yea
Hath God Said?, January Issue of Burning
Bush Volume 10 Number 1).
|
|
3. |
Many
English versions have been published, but
none has yet overthrown the KJV. The KJV
remains the best, most faithful, reliable,
accurate, trustworthy, beautiful English
Bible we have today. Can the venerable KJV
ever be replaced? Should we ever think of
revising it? Here is Dean Burgon’s reply:
“Whatever may be urged in favour of Biblical
Revision, it is at least undeniable that the
undertaking involves a tremendous risk. Our
Authorized Version is the one religious link
which at present binds together … millions
of English-speaking men scattered over the
earth’s surface. Is it reasonable that so
unutterably precious, so sacred a bond
should be endangered, for the sake of
representing certain words more
accurately,—here and there translating a
tense with greater precision,—getting rid of
a few archaisms? It may be confidently
assumed that no ‘Revision’ of our Authorized
Version, however judiciously executed, will
ever occupy the place in public esteem which
is actually enjoyed by the work of the
Translators of 1611,—the noblest literary
work in the Anglo-Saxon language. We shall
in fact never have another
‘Authorized Version’” (Revision Revised,
113). |
|
|
|
IV. |
SUMMARY
Our earnest contention for
the inerrancy and infallibility of an extant Bible in the
original languages is not an act of schism but of love for
both God and man. We are intent on teaching “all the
counsel of God” (Acts 20:27); we can do no less. The
doctrine of VPP promotes God and glorifies Him, for it
testifies of His character as One who is the same yesterday,
today and forever. He means what He says, and says what He
means. “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My WORDS
shall not pass away” (Matt 24:35). Is this divine
statement not clear enough?
Dr Jeffrey Khoo in his critique (published in FEBC Burning
Bush Volume 10 Number 1) of the book One Bible Only? wrote
‘Hindus and Muslims all believe that their scriptures, the
Bhagavad Gita and the Koran respectively, are perfect. Yet
Christians who claim to believe in the one living and true
God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and Christ the only
Mediator and Saviour of the world, are not so quick to
believe they have an existing infallible and inerrant
Scripture. What a shame!’ If we adopt a non-VPP position,
then Christianity is no longer true, and Christians shall
become the laughing stock of the religious world. Indeed, if
the Christian Bible is not perfect, infallible and inerrant
today and it is a thing of the past, “then is our
preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are
found false witnesses of God; … If in this life only we have
hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (1 Cor
15:14-15, 19).
Basically, those who hold to the VPP of Scripture believe
and embrace the following tenets:
|
1. |
God has
supernaturally preserved each and every one of His
inspired Hebrew/Aramaic OT words and Greek NT words
to the last jot and tittle, so that in every age,
God’s people will always have in their possession
His infallible and inerrant Word kept intact without
the loss of any word (Ps 12:6-7, Matt 5:18, 24:35,
Mark 13:31, Luke 21:33, John 10:35, 1 Pet1:23-25).
|
|
2. |
The “providential”
preservation of Scriptures is understood as God’s
special and not general providence. Special
providence or providentia extraordinaria
speaks of God’s miraculous intervention in the
events of history and in the affairs of mankind in
fulfilment of His sovereign will for the sake of His
elect and to the glory of His Name. The divine
preservation of the Canon (books) and Text (words)
of Scripture comes under God’s special
providence.
|
|
3. |
The Bible is not
only infallible and inerrant in the past (in the
Autographs), but also infallible and inerrant today
(in the Apographs).
|
|
4. |
The infallible and
inerrant words of Scripture are found in the
faithfully preserved Traditional/Byzantine/Majority
manuscripts, and fully represented in the Printed
and Received Text (or Textus Receptus) that underlie
the Reformation Bibles best represented by the KJV,
and NOT in the corrupted and rejected texts
of Westcott and Hort that underlie the many modern
versions of the English Bible like the NIV, NASV,
ESV, RSV, TEV, CEV, etc.
|
|
5. |
There are no
mistakes in the Bible, period. There are no mistakes
or errors (scribal or otherwise) in such OT passages
as Judges 18:30, 1 Samuel 13:1, 1 Kings 4:26, 1
Chronicles 18:3, 2 Chronicles 22:2 etc. If there are
“discrepancies” in the Bible, the “discrepancies”
are only seeming or apparent, NOT real or
actual. Any inability to understand or explain such
difficult passages in no way negates the
infallibility and inerrancy of the Scriptures,
applying the faithful Pauline principle of biblical
interpretation: “let God be true, but every man a
liar” (Rom 3:4).
|
|
6. |
Knowing where the
perfect Bible is is a matter of textual recognition
and NOT textual criticism. In the field of
textual recognition, Burgon is good, Hills is
better, Waite is best.
|
|
7. |
The Chinese Union
Version (CUV) is the “Word of God” for the Chinese
people today since it is the best, most faithful,
most reliable, and most accurate version among the
Chinese versions presently available. Great care
ought to be taken not to undermine our Chinese
brethren’s confidence in the CUV. Nevertheless,
versions or translations are never superior to the
inspired and preserved Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek
Scriptures; thus there is a need to consult these
original language Scriptures for clarity and fulness
of meaning, and to compare Scripture with Scripture. |
|
|
|
