The Westminster Divines were aware of textual variants. Renowned scholars like Brian Walton, who was working on a polyglot Bible with textual notes, were members of the Westminster Assembly. Their statement that the text was "kept pure" was a statement of theological conviction about the reliability and authority of the text they possessed, not a claim that every jot and tittle had been perfectly transmitted without any human copying errors.
Therefore, to claim that perfect preservation is of the same fundamental nature as inspiration and that it is exclusively found in one textual tradition (VPP) is to add a requirement that the Confession itself does not make. It shifts the basis of authority from God's providence in preserving a reliable text to a scholarly (or pseudo-scholarly) argument about one specific textual stream.
For this reason, most confessional Presbyterian and Reformed denominations (e.g., PCA, OPC, URCNA) and theologians reject VPP as an extra-confessional innovation that goes beyond the principles of the Westminster Standards. They uphold the Confession's view of a providentially preserved, pure, and sufficient text without adopting the stricter, more theoretical claims of VPP.
No comments:
Post a Comment