KJV and Doctrine of VPP

The King James Bible And The Doctrine of
Verbal Plenary Preservation

I.	INTRODUCTION What is the relationship between the King James Bible and the doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation of God’s Word? The answer is simple. The King James Bible accurately preserves God’s divine words in the Hebrew and Greek languages by accurately translating these words into the English language. To avoid confusion and misunderstanding of the matter, it is necessary to clarify that VPP proponents believe God has preserved for His people His 100% Perfect Hebrew and Greek words. And these are the Hebrew and Greek words that underlie the King James Bible. The King James Bible is only a translation. No translated words can be better than the inspired Hebrew and Greek words given by God. When using the KJB, it is necessary to go back to the words in the original languages for clarity and fullness of meaning. By way of illustration, the words in the original languages underlying the KJB are like the perfect platinum ruler of the Smithsonian Institute, inerrant, infallible, and authoritative. The KJB and other accurate and reliable translations are like the common ruler, though not perfect, are good and safe enough for use. In this study, we shall look at how we got our King James Bible and how the King James Bible is superior in four areas (Texts, Translators, Techniques, Theology) as compared to all the other modern English Bible translations today.
II.	THE BOOK OF BOOKS … HOW WE GOT THE KING JAMES BIBLE 1 No book is like the Bible: it is the BOOK of books. Its words are “God-breathed,” inspired. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God . . .” (2 Tim 3:16). God was the unseen Author; the men who wrote were amanuenses. 2 Peter 1:19–21 says, For we have also a more sure word of prophecy; . . .. Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. In old time God spoke, and holy men wrote. To John the Apostle it was given to “bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ . . .” (Rev 1:2). Our Lord, the One that sat upon the Throne, said to John: “Write: for these words are true and faithful” (Rev 21:5). The spoken words are preserved for us through the ages, as the written words in the Bible, a sure record that withstands the ravages of time and decay. The original records of God’s words, the AUTOGRAPHS, were written in Hebrew (almost all of the Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament). Today the autographs are long gone through years of hard usage. But copies of God’s words are still with us. Thanks be unto God for preserving His words in the thousands of Hebrew and Greek manuscripts by the hands of faithful men. God has not left Himself without a witness. The Word of God is not to be bound, but must be published to all people, that they may obtain salvation by Jesus Christ. For this purpose God raised up godly men of wisdom and learning, to translate His Word into many languages. Our discussion here focuses on the English translations, not the non-English translations. John Wycliffe was the first to give the English people a translation in their own tongue (1382), but it was based on the Latin Vulgate (a Latin Bible translated from Hebrew and Greek). William Tyndale was the first to produce an English translation from the original Greek and Hebrew texts (1525), for which he suffered martyrdom. Other translations followed, based on the same Hebrew and Greek texts: Coverdale (1535), Matthew (1537), Taverner (1539), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva (1560), the Bishops’ (1568). These translations were useful as forerunners of the King James Version (KJV) or Authorised Version (AV) of 1611. Within a short time of its appearance, the KJV was acknowledged as the superior and unrivalled translation. This was due to the superior scholarship of the translators: a team of the best scholars from Oxford and Cambridge, who were godly men with a high view of the Scriptures, fully committed to the accurate and faithful rendering of God’s eternal Word from the original languages into the best classical English. The KJV or Authorised Version (AV) is the Twenty-First Century English Reader’s Bible. We present this Book to our readers as THE one English translation which, above all other English Bibles, is the most complete, accurate and faithful English translation of the original inspired words of God. With the KJB, the reader will not be deceived in any matters that God has chosen to reveal to us through His inspired words.
III.	A FOUR-FOLD SUPERIORITY OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE 2 A. Superior Original Language Texts The textual foundation of the King James Bible is the best compared to that used by all other English Bibles that exist today. The King James Old Testament is translated from the Traditional Masoretic Hebrew Old Testament text (Ben Chayyim). The Masoretes handed down this text from generation to generation, guarded it and kept it well. The majority of the modern English versions, however, were translated from other Hebrew texts like Rudolph Kittel's Biblia Hebraica, Samaritan Pentateuch, etc., which are different from the Traditional Masoretic Text. If the Hebrew foundation of the modern English versions and the King James Bible are different, how can their translated English words be the same? Surely, they cannot be the same. They are different. Why is the Old Testament Hebrew Text of the King James Bible superior? It is superior because: Firstly, it was preserved by the Jews. Secondly, the traditional text of the Jews was authorised by Jesus. He has never refuted any text, any word or any letter in the Hebrew Old Testament. He stamped His authorisation on the Masoretic Hebrew Text. He did not give His approval on the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, some scribal tradition, Josephus, Jerome, the Syriac version or any other document present at that time! In Matthew 5:18, Jesus said, "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." This proves that our Lord believes in the preservation of the Scripture to the extent that every word of it has been kept intact. The King James Bible is also based on a superior Greek New Testament, the Textus Receptus. The chief opponent of the Textus Receptus is the Nestle/Aland Greek New Testament 26th edition, which is used in most colleges, universities, and seminaries today (even conservative and/or fundamental ones). The editors of this corrupt Greek Text were made up of a committee comprising unbelievers, a Roman Catholic Cardinal, and apostates. Basically, it is this same Greek Text that underlies almost all modern English versions. The Textus Receptus that underlies the King James Bible, however, was received by the Church for almost 1,800 years until 1881 when Westcott and Hort’s Greek Text came into the scene. Since then, almost all preachers studied this corrupt Greek Text, but still preached out of the King James Bible (which was based on a different Greek text). Later, even the King James Bible was kicked out in favour of English Bibles that are based on the “preferred” corrupt Greek text. B. Superior Translators The King James translators were men of great spiritual insight. They believed that people need to read the Bible, and therefore, there was a need for proper translation of the Scripture. There were fifty-seven translators, divided into six teams. They met in three cities, namely, Cambridge, Westminster and Oxford. They began their work in 1604 and completed it in 1611. In both Westminster and Oxford, the translators focused on the Old Testament and New Testament. In Cambridge, they had a team working with the Old Testament and Apocrypha. Even though the translators included the Apocrypha in the original King James Bible, they did not believe it was inspired. Therefore, they translated it as history between the Old and New Testaments. Dr. John Reynolds, a devout puritan, led this great work of translation from the beginning to the end. Many of them possessed superb language skills and were known for their expertise in Hebrew, Greek and English. They applied their skills and did excellently in the translation. With all these fifty-seven superior translators, we can be assured of the superiority of their product. C. Superior Technique There are two aspects to the superior technique used by the translators of the King James Bible: Superior Team Technique, and Superior Translation Technique. The King James Bible was translated differently from other modern English versions. Each translator had to translate the books on his own, unaided by anyone else. Every translator on the six teams, fifty-seven of them, had to be so skilled in the Hebrew or Greek books assigned to him that he had to translate all of them by himself in his own handwriting. In addition, they had a total of fifteen rules to govern their translation work. They had a team technique that is unequalled by any modern translators. This is how they do it. They had about seven translators in a team. One translator is assigned to one book. For each completed book, it had to be examined by the other six translators individually, and one more time meeting together to go over it to decide which translated words would stand – in total eight times. Then it will be sent to the other five teams for vetting – that is five more times and at the end they had a joint meeting of two men from each of the six teams – twelve men. That makes a total of fourteen different times for one book. That was how they translated, analysed and corrected in their translation from Genesis to Revelation. This technique was a team effort and certainly superior without any doubt! The translation technique adopted by the King James translators is the verbal and formal translation technique. This method is the translation of Hebrew and Greek words as closely as possible into English. Every noun, adjective, preposition, participle and so on in the Hebrew and Greek text is brought into the English in the same way. That includes the structure and form as well. Dynamic equivalence is directly opposite of the verbal and formal equivalence technique. It is not a word-for-word translation. The words were either added, changed or subtracted in the English. This is also known as “paraphrasing.” Should not God's Word be read in English exactly as we would find in the Hebrew and Greek texts? We can see this in the King James Bible which has been translated by the verbal and formal equivalence technique, but not in other modern versions which used the dynamic equivalence technique that mixes God's words with man's words. Indeed we can confidently trust that the King James Bible is God's Word accurately translated into English. D. Superior Theology There are those who say that no vital doctrine is affected in the modern English versions. This claim is clearly false. There are two possible ways theology (or doctrines) can be affected in the modern English versions: (a) through the translators’ paraphrasing in the modern English versions, (b) through the corrupt Greek text used. Theology is affected in the modern English versions when important words in the Greek text are changed or omitted. The followings are just some examples how theology has been affected: a) The Doctrine of Holy Trinity 1 John 5:7 (KJV based on the TR): “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” 1 John 5:8 (KJV based on TR): “And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” 1 John 5:7 and 8 are one of the clearest biblical support for the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Yet, the italicized portions are eliminated from the corrupt Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and are therefore not found in the modern English versions that are based on these corrupt Greek texts. Egs of such English versions are the NIV, NASV, and NKJV. This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology. The corrupt Greek texts and their subsequent English translations are theologically deficient, whereas the Textus Receptus and, subsequently, the King James Bible are theologically superior. b) The Doctrine of the Judgment 2 Peter 3:10 (KJV based on the TR): “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” The italicized portion is altered in the corrupt Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and their subsequent English translations (NIV, NKJV). Instead of the words “burned up,” the words “laid bare” are used. There is a vast difference between “burned up” and “laid bare.” The word “laid bare” is an entirely different concept and word picture. This is no clear description of how hell is to be like. This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology. There corrupt Greek texts and their subsequent English translations are theologically deficient, whereas the Textus Receptus and, subsequently, the King James Bible are theologically superior. c) The Doctrine of the Christ Luke 2:22 (KJV based on the TR): “And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.” The italicized portion is changed in the Greek texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus) and their subsequent English translations (NIV, NASV, NB). The word “her” is changed to “their,” thus making the Lord Jesus Christ One who needed “purification,” and therefore a sinner! This is unthinkable! This is certainly a matter of doctrine and theology. These Greek texts and their subsequent English translations are theologically deficient, whereas the Textus Receptus and, subsequently, the King James Bible are theologically superior. Other theological doctrines affected that are either eliminated, altered or changed are the doctrine of the church (Revelation 2:15), the doctrine of angels (Luke 22:43), the doctrine of Satan (Luke 4:8), the doctrine of the Bible (Mark 16:9-20; John 7:53-8:11; etc.), the doctrine of last things or prophecy (Matthew 25:13; Mark 12:23; etc.), the doctrine of salvation (Revelation 21:24; 1 Peter 2:2; etc.), and the doctrine of Christ (John 3:13; 1 Corinthians 11:24; etc.). Theology is indeed affected and undermined in the modern English versions today. How can the whole counsel of God be faithfully taught in these modern English perversions?
IV.	THE GREEK SOURCE TEXT OF MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES 3 The subject has been well researched and documented by the Trinitarian Bible Society of England in “The Divine Original.” We can do no better than quote from it: The Vatican and Sinai Manuscripts In the mid-nineteenth century the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus became available to Biblical scholars, and in 1881 Westcott and Hort advanced the theory that the New Testament text was preserved in an almost perfect state in these two fourth century manuscripts. The discovery of these MSS betrayed many Biblical students into a lamentable infirmity of critical judgement. Tischendorf himself, the discoverer of the Sinai Codex, amended his eighth edition in at least 3,505 places in conformity with new readings which he found in this document. The Codex Vaticanus exercised a similar mesmeric influence on the minds of many 19th and 20th century scholars. The Revised Greek Text underlying the modern versions has the support only of that very small minority of the available MSS which are in some respects in agreement with the unreliable text of the Sinai and Vatican codices. An Elaborate Theory Westcott and Hort devised an elaborate theory, based more on imagination and intuition than upon evidence, elevating this little group of MSS to the heights of almost infallible authority. Their treatise on the subject and their edition of the Greek NT exercised a powerful and far-reaching influence, not only on the next generation of students and scholars, but also indirectly upon the minds of millions who have had neither the ability, nor the time, nor the inclination to submit the theory to a searching examination. Doctrinal Deficiencies of these MSS These two MSS and a few others containing a similar text present in a weakened form many passages of Holy Scripture which speak most plainly of the deity of the Son of God. The trend of Biblical scholarship in the 19th and 20th centuries has been towards a “humanitarian” view of the person of Christ. It is not surprising that many modern scholars should welcome the support of these two ancient documents, but it is sad to see so many earnest evangelical Christians ready to accept without question a theory so destructive of the faith once delivered to the saints. The True Text The Sinai and Vatican manuscripts represent a small family of documents containing various readings which the Church as a whole rejected before the end of the 4th century. Under the singular care and providence of God more reliable MSS were multiplied and copied from generation to generation, and the great majority of existing MSS exhibit a faithful reproduction of the true text which was acknowledged by the entire Greek Church in the Byzantine period A.D. 312–1453. . . . This text is represented by the Authorised Version and other Protestant translations up to the latter part of the 19th century. 4 The foregoing revelation by the Trinitarian Bible Society is simply devastating! In the critical assessment of ancient Bible texts, we must rely on trustworthy experts in the fields. No one was better qualified than the brilliant linguist and Bible scholar John William Burgon (1813–1888). A man of rare integrity and fidelity to Holy Scripture, he was alarmed by the rising wave of antagonism against the Word of God. Burgon, determined to unravel the truth about the newly discovered texts, went to Rome in 1860 to examine the Codex Vaticanus and to Mount Sinai to acquaint himself with St. Catherine’s monastery where the Codex Sinaiticus was found. A meticulous student, Burgon gave himself wholly to extensive study of Greek manuscripts, to research in the textual field, in order to be adequately equipped to defend the Bible under attack. We quote from David Cloud’s publication, Modern Bible Versions: Of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and the textual theories which exalt these manuscripts, the brilliant John Burgon, after decades of lonely, vigilant toil in the dim corners of Britain, Europe, and Egypt, testified: “On first seriously applying ourselves to these studies, many years ago . . . turn which way we would, we were encountered by the same confident terminology: ‘the best documents,’ ‘primary manuscripts,’ ‘first-rate authorities,’ ‘primitive evidence,’ ‘ancient readings,’ and so forth: we found that thereby codices א [Sinaiticus] or B [Vaticanus], codices C or D [two similar manuscripts] were invariably and exclusively meant. It was not until we had laboriously collated these documents for ourselves, that we became aware of their true character. Long before coming to the end of our task (and it occupied us, off and on, for eight years) we had become convinced that the supposed ‘best documents’ and ‘first-rate authorities’ are in reality among the worst. “A diligent inspection of a vast number of later copies scattered throughout the principal libraries of Europe, and the exact collation of a few, further convinced us that the deference generally claimed for B, א, C, D is nothing else but a weak superstition and a vulgar error, that the date for a MS is not of its essence, but is a mere accident of the problem, and that later copies . . . on countless occasions, and as a rule, preserve those delicate lineaments and minute refinements which the ‘old uncials’ are constantly observed to obliterate. And so, rising to a systematic survey of the entire field of Evidence, we found reason to suspect more and more the soundness of the conclusions at which Lachmann, Tregelles, and Tischendorf had arrived: while we seemed led, as if by the hand, to discern plain indications of the existence for ourselves of a far ‘more excellent way’ (Revision Revised, pp. 337, 338). “We suspect that these two manuscripts [Sinaiticus and Vaticanus] are indebted for their preservation, solely to their ascertained evil character; which has occasioned that the one eventually found its way, four centuries ago, to a forgotten shelf in the Vatican library; while the other, after exercising the ingenuity of several generations of critical correctors, eventually got deposited in the waste-paper basket of the convent at the foot of Mount Sinai. Had these been copies of average purity, they must long since have shared the inevitable fate of books which are freely used and highly prized; namely, they would have fallen into decadence and disappeared from sight (Revision Revised, p. 319).” Thus we see that during the 1800s, one of the greatest missionary eras in history, while godly men were carrying the preserved Bible to the ends of the earth, unbelieving textual critics, enamoured by German rationalism, went about searching the dusty libraries of apostate institutions to rediscover the Word of God that had never been lost! 5 These two MSS fell into the hands of Westcott and Hort, two unregenerate professors in Cambridge, who promptly elevated them to a place of authority, lending the weight of their names to the texts.
V.	TWO ANGLICAN CHURCHMEN FROM CAMBRIDGE 6 Soon after the discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, two learned professors, Westcott and Hort, Anglican Churchmen from Cambridge, got to work on these defective manuscripts. Out of them they published their edition of the Greek NT which was then presented to the world as the most accurate, authentic and trustworthy. With their stamp of authority, their Greek NT literally captured the imagination of the scholastic community. Since then the Westcott-Hort Greek NT has dominated the field of NT Greek scholars and translators around the world. By one fell stroke the TR (Textus Receptus or Majority Text) was dethroned, and the Westcott-Hort (W-H) text was seated in the chair of authority. While these two men and their followers exalt their text as “the best,” another school (as we have seen) rejects them as “the worst.” What does God’s Word say on the matter? Our Lord’s teaching from the “Sermon on the Mount” (Matt 7:15–18) applies: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Then says the Apostle James: “Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? Can the fig tree . . . bear olive berries? . . . so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh” (Jas 3:11–12). What sort of “tree” and “fountain” are Westcott and Hort? What are their doctrinal beliefs and persuasion? These have been subjected to a penetrating analysis in Heresies of Westcott and Hort by D A Waite. Behind their academic gowns and “evangelical” façade, the real Westcott and Hort harboured a secret affection for Rome and the Virgin Mary. By their own writings the men reveal their true selves: unregenerate, strangers to the saving grace of God, and enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hereat we present incontrovertible proof of the unbelief and anti-Christian position of Westcott and Hort, summarised from Waite’s book.7 Denials of Basic Bible Truth by Westcott and Hort Whether jointly or individually, Westcott and Hort, by their own pens, have denied or attacked the following fundamental doctrines of “the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3). Westcott and Hort DENIED: a) the doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture, b) the Genesis record of the Creation and the Fall of man, c) the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, His eternal pre-existence and Godhead, His Messiahship, and His sinlessness, d) the substitutionary atonement of Christ and redemption by His blood, e) the bodily resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, f) the Second Coming of Christ, g) the doctrine of Eternal Life, h) the reality of Heaven and Hell, i) the personality of the Devil. Westcott and Hort BELIEVED IN: a) the inherent goodness and perfectibility of man, b) the Darwinian theory of Evolution, c) the Universal Fatherhood of God, d) the ultimate salvation of all men, e) the efficacy of water baptism for Regeneration. Westcott and Hort were false prophets, ravening wolves in sheep’s clothing (Matt 7:15) “deceitful workers, transforming themselves into … ministers of righteousness” (2 Cor 11:13-15). Their theories of Textual Criticism are false and must be utterly rejected. Their NT Greek Text is therefore also to be utterly rejected as pernicious poison. And yet a hundred new Bibles have flowed from this corrupt source.
VI.	THE TRANSLATORS’ AWESOME TASK 8 The translation of God’s Word is an awesome task fraught with grave responsibility. What mortal being is worthy to handle and translate the words of the Almighty? Even as those who teach the Word of God must exercise utmost care: “. . . the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little . . .” (Isa 28:13), so must they who translate God’s Word exercise the utmost care. Those who handle God’s Word are warned: “Every word of God is pure: . . . Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar” (Prov 30:5–6). In repelling the tempter, our Lord used only God’s Word, “It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matt 4:4). Every word in the Bible is important! Every word must be faithfully and precisely translated without distortion, without variation, whether more or less. Only with utmost reverence then should one handle God’s Word. Such was the attitude of the men who translated the KJV. Those godly men of rare scholarship, holding a “high view” of Holy Scripture, endeavoured to translate word for word and phrase for phrase so as to capture the very spirit of the original text, and thus express the mind of God faithfully. This precise “word for word” method (“formal equivalence” or “verbal equivalence”) ensures that the KJV conveys God’s message with a degree of literal and grammatical fidelity unrivalled by any other modern English version. One Translator’s Reckless Methodology Eugene Nida is an unregenerate man who denies the blood atonement, the reality of angels and miracles, and the infallibility of Holy Scripture. Yet he occupied a key position in the Translations Department of the United Bible Societies. By the introduction of his new translation methodology, “Dynamic Equivalence,” Eugene Nida has become the most influential person in the field of Bible translation. The theory behind Nida’s “Dynamic Equivalence” goes something like this: a) The message and events of Scripture are bound in the culture of the past. b) The strict “word for word” translation being “static” does not release the message of God. c) “Dynamic Equivalence” unbinds the message which “leaps out” at the reader in today’s language and culture. d) By this method the translator is at liberty to express just how he feels were the Author’s thoughts. e) Instead of “word for word,” it is now “thought for word,” ie, man’s thoughts in place of God’s Word. Eugene Nida’s theory is theological liberalism, which is unbelief. It reduces God to man’s level. It implies that God is unable to communicate with His creatures in an intelligible manner without man’s aid. Nida is an infidel, a “corrupt tree” which “bringeth forth evil fruit” (Matt 7:17). The corrupted Modern English Bibles have come by the “Dynamic Equivalence” method of translation. A corrupt methodology gives rise to corrupt versions: “by their fruits ye shall know them” (Matt 7:20). Heed the warning of the Scripture: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD” (Isa 55:8). It is supreme folly and reckless presumption for any man to venture to “think God’s thoughts” by wanton manipulation of God’s inspired Word.
VII.	THE DOCTOR’S PRESCRIPTION 9 1. A good doctor’s prescription spells life and health to the patient. It is written in exact and precise terms. With words (and figures) the doctor expresses his thoughts. 2. The doctor’s prescription must not be tampered with: nothing must be added, nothing taken away. There must be no variation or manipulation. 3. A good pharmacist dispenses the prescription exactly as written, word for word, letter for letter, precise to the minutest detail. Not even a “jot or tittle” must be altered. (A dot moved one space to the right increases a dose tenfold!) 4. A good pharmacist dispenses good, wholesome, effective, healthful medicine. When taken, the patient recovers. 5. An enemy gets his hands on the prescription and alters it. A deadly medicine is dispensed. When taken, the patient dies. Modern English Bibles are deadly medicine. GOD’S WORD OUR PRESCRIPTION 1. Our God, the soul’s Physician, has a Prescription for life: the Bible. 2. It comes to us by the hands of men of old inspired by the Holy Spirit, copyists, and translators. The business of these copyists and translators is to keep to the Bible text exactly as written: word for word, letter for letter, without alteration or variation. 3. The faithful “word for word” method of translation is termed “Verbal Equivalence.” 4. The translators of the KJV Bible appointed by King James used the Verbal Equivalence method, word for word, as originally given by God. 5. The MSS they used were faithful copies of the original, known as the Received Text (TR) or the Majority Text. 6. The result of their translation: a sound, accurate, faithful Bible, the “King James Version” or “Authorised Version” true to its Author in every vital detail. 7. We confidently believe that the KJV or AV is God’s Word kept intact in English, God’s perfect Prescription for the English-speaking world.
VIII.	CONCLUSION Our all-wise God has ordained that His purpose in Creation and Redemption should be accomplished by His Word. So highly has He esteemed His Word that He magnified it above His name (Ps 138:2). God’s Word is forever settled in heaven (Ps 119:89); it cannot be broken (John 10:35), neither shall it pass away (Matt 24:35). Our Lord has confirmed, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matt 5:18). Who, then, should dare to alter “one jot or one tittle” of the Word of God? Such reckless daring shall have its due reward: … “If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life…” (Rev 22:18-19). God has spoken, be warned! If we reject the doctrine of VPP, we effectively reject the faithful KJB as well. It is such an irony that VPP opponents who hold in high esteem the KJB and yet (a) despise the KJB’s underlying Hebrew and Greek texts, and (b) believe that the preservation of the inspired Greek words of God is also to be found in the corrupt Westcott and Hort critical texts. The battle today is the battle for the Bible. It is the battle for the King James Bible and its underlying Hebrew and Greek texts over the many modern English versions and their corrupt texts. This battle seeks to recapture for the Church the traditional text and the doctrine of Bible preservation.10 God has certainly preserved His words for us today. But where are His words? They are the Hebrew words found in the Traditional Masoretic Hebrew Old Testament (Ben Chayyim) and the Greek words found in the Traditional Greek New Testament of Textus Receptus, the underlying original language texts of the King James Bible. The KJB accurately preserves the Hebrew and Greek words in the English language based on its four-fold superiority: Texts, Translators, Technique and Theology. “When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the spirit of the LORD shall lift up a Standard against him” (Isa 59:19). “… Thy Word is Truth” (John 17:17). “For we can do nothing against the Truth, but for the Truth” (2 Cor 13:8). “But the Word of the LORD endureth forever…” (1 Pet 1:25). “Nevertheless the Foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are His. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Tim 2:19). Amen.

NOTES

¹     This part is adapted from chapter 1 of S H Tow’s In Defence of The King James Holy Bible, a booklet published by Calvary Bible-Presbyterian Church, Singapore.

²    This part is written with reference to D A Waite’s Defending The King James Bible (Collingwood: The Bible For Today Press, 1994).

³    Chapter 6 of In Defence of the King James Holy Bible.

⁴   The Divine Original (London: Trinitarian Bible Society, nd), 6-7.

⁵    David Cloud, Modern Bible Versions (Oak Harbor: Way of Life Literature, 1994), 28-30.

⁶    Chapter 7 of In Defence of the King James Holy Bible.

⁷    See D A Waite, Heresies of Westcott and Hort (Collingswood: The Bible For Today, 1979).

⁸    Chapter 8 of In Defence of the King James Holy Bible.

⁹    Ibid, chapter 9.

¹⁰    Jeffrey Khoo, Kept Pure In All Ages (Singapore: Far Eastern Bible College Press, 2001), 17.