The Greek language began to influence Jewish people during the Hellenistic period

Alexander the Great's conquests in the 4th century BCE led to the establishment of the Hellenistic kingdoms, which promoted Greek language and culture throughout their territories.

It is important to note that while Greek became a common language among Jewish people during the Hellenistic period, Hebrew remained the primary language of Jewish religious and cultural life. The Septuagint was primarily used by Jews who lived in Greek-speaking areas and by early Christians

Please view the video below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2g62t2opS3g

MODELS OF JERUSALEM FROM 13 DIFFERENT PERIODS. 

1. MELCHIZEDEK

2. JEBUS

3. DAVID

4. SOLOMON

5. HEZEKIAH

6. DESTRUCTION

7. NEHEMIAH

8. GREEK

9. HEROD

10. DESTRUCTION 2

11. ROMAN

12. BYZANTIUM

13. ARAB

Was Jesus pursuing a perfect Bible at the time?

The Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, and Greek New Testament are interconnected texts that form the foundation of Christian and Jewish religious traditions.

Hebrew Bible:

The original text of the Jewish scriptures, written primarily in Hebrew (with some sections in Aramaic).

It is considered the most authoritative source of Jewish religious teachings.

It consists of three main parts: the Torah (five books of Moses), the Nevi'im (prophets), and the Ketuvim (writings).

Septuagint:

A Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, created in the 3rd century BCE.

It was commissioned by Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the ruler of Egypt.

The Septuagint became the primary text used by early Christians, as Greek was the lingua franca of the Roman Empire.

It includes additional books not found in the Hebrew Bible, known as the Deuterocanonical books.

Greek New Testament:

A collection of 27 books written in Greek, primarily in the 1st century CE.

It contains the Gospels (accounts of Jesus' life and teachings), the Acts of the Apostles (history of the early Christian church), the Epistles (letters written by Paul and other early Christian leaders), and the Revelation (a prophetic book).

The Greek New Testament is based on the Septuagint, as it was the primary source of scripture for early Christians.

It includes references to the Hebrew Bible and often quotes passages from it.

Q&A:

Why was the New Testament written in Greek, not Hebrew?

The primary reason the New Testament was written in Greek rather than Hebrew:

1. Greek as the Lingua Franca: In the 1st century CE, Greek had become the lingua franca of the Mediterranean region, especially among the Roman Empire. This made it a practical choice for communicating with a diverse audience.
2. Influence of the Septuagint: The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, was widely used by Jews and early Christians. This made Greek a familiar language for discussing biblical topics.

Are the Hebrew Bible and Septuagint free of errors?

No, neither the Hebrew Bible nor the Septuagint are perfect without error. Both texts have undergone a long history of transmission, copying, and translation, which has inevitably led to the introduction of variations and potential errors.

1. Human error: Scribes who copied the texts may have made mistakes, such as omissions, additions, or changes in wording.
2. Translation issues: The Septuagint, being a translation from Hebrew to Greek, may have introduced errors due to misunderstandings or differences in language and culture.
3. Textual variants: Over time, different versions of the text may have emerged, leading to textual variants that can be difficult to reconcile.

Despite these imperfections, both Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint are considered to be highly reliable sources of the biblical text. Scholars have spent centuries studying these texts and comparing them to other ancient manuscripts to identify and correct errors. While there may still be some uncertainties, the overall accuracy of these texts is generally accepted.

It's important to note that the study of textual criticism continues to be an active field of research, and new discoveries may lead to a better understanding of the original text.

Was Jesus pursuing a perfect Bible at the time? 

There is no explicit biblical proof that Jesus was actively pursuing such a thing.

The Bible itself is a collection of texts written over centuries by various authors, each with their own perspectives and styles. While Jesus certainly referred to the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old Testament) as authoritative, he didn't explicitly address the idea of a single, perfect version of the Bible.

Here are some relevant biblical passages to consider:

Matthew 5:17-18: Jesus says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter or one stroke of a letter will pass away from the Law until all has been accomplished." This suggests that Jesus valued the existing Scriptures, Jesus accepted the Old Testament in Hebrew and the Old Testament in Greek-Septuagint, but it doesn't imply a pursuit of a perfect version.   

John 14:26: Jesus promises the disciples, "The Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and remind you of everything I have told you." This suggests that the Holy Spirit would guide the early Christians in understanding and interpreting Scripture, but it doesn't imply a need for a perfect version.   

It's important to note that the concept of a "perfect Bible" is a relatively modern one. The early Christians did not have a single, unified canon of Scripture, and the process of canonization took place over several centuries. The focus was on understanding and interpreting the existing texts, rather than creating a perfect version.

In conclusion, there is no explicit biblical proof that Jesus was pursuing a perfect Bible in His time. While he valued the Hebrew Scriptures and emphasized their importance, he didn't address the idea of a single, perfect version. The focus was on understanding and interpreting the existing texts with the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Do we have a perfect Bible now?

No, we do not have a perfect Bible now. While the Bible has been carefully preserved and transmitted over centuries, it is still a human document that has undergone a long history of translation, copying, and interpretation. As a result, there are variations and potential errors in the text.

Here are some reasons why we cannot say that we have a perfect Bible:

1. Human error: Scribes who copied the text may have made mistakes, such as omissions, additions, or changes in wording.
2. Translation issues: The Bible has been translated into many languages, and the process of translation can introduce errors or nuances that are not present in the original text.
3. Textual variants: Over time, different versions of the text may have emerged, leading to textual variants that can be difficult to reconcile.

Despite these imperfections, the Bible (Tanakh, Masoretic Text, Septuagint, TR, various Greek Manuscripts) is considered to be a highly reliable source of religious and historical information. Scholars have spent centuries studying the text and comparing different versions to identify and correct errors. While there may still be some uncertainties, the overall accuracy of the Bible is generally accepted.

It's important to remember that the Bible is a living document that continues to be studied and interpreted by people around the world. As our understanding of the text evolves, we may gain new insights into its meaning and significance.

My conclusion:

Because Jesus did not seek a perfect Bible in His time, He did not attack the Septuagint, He did not rebuke those who read the Septuagint, and the Jewish people had both the Hebrew Bible and the Septuagint, both are not perfect. I propose to Bible teachers at Far Eastern Bible College in Singapore not to act as if they are smarter than Jesus Christ our Lord by promoting a Perfect Greek Bible underlying the KJV and attacking those who read the NIV and ESV, as well as those who dislike the KJV.

While it is true that Jesus primarily used the Hebrew Bible, he did not explicitly condemn the Septuagint. It is important to note that Jesus' understanding of Scripture was rooted in his Jewish tradition, which primarily relied on the Hebrew Bible. His emphasis on the Hebrew Scriptures reflects the cultural and religious context of his time.

The fact is Jewish people had access to both the Hebrew Bible (OT) and the Septuagint (OT). I repeat, both are not perfect. The Septuagint was particularly valuable for Jewish communities living in Greek-speaking areas. The Hebrew Bible remained the primary source of authority for Jewish religious life.

I rebuke lecturers from Far Eastern Bible College for criticizing their students who read the NIV, ESV, or dislike the KJV. Teachers must critically examine various translations and interpretations of Scripture. Rather than pursuing a perfect Bible or a perfect Greek TR underlying the King James Version. Rather than dividing the One Body of Christ due to Bible versions. I am genuinely concerned that a Bible college may become a terrorist training camp for young men and women to attack those who disagree with their theological beliefs. 

I understood, it is important to foster respectful dialogue and avoid personal attacks, it is crucial for Bible teachers to engage in critical examination of different translations and interpretations of Scripture. I pray these so called "Bible teachers" in FEBC, to stop promoting the heresy of Verbal Plenary Preservation, and start to live in peace with one another.

Luke did not quote word by word from the Old Testament.

To demonstrate that the NT authors did not quote the OT word for word. I am going to give you an example.

When Luke was writing the book of Acts, he quoted Amos 9:11-12, but he did not quote the Old Testament verbatim. Please have a look.

Amos 9:11-12 (King James Version)

11 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:

12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the Lord that doeth this.

 

 Acts 15:16-18 (King James Version)

16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:

 17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

Amos 9:11-12 (LXX) 

Septuagint in English

11 In that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and will rebuild the ruins of it, and will set up the parts thereof that have been broken down, and will build it up as in the ancient days:

12 that the remnant of men, and all the Gentiles upon whom my name is called, may earnestly seek , saith the Lord who does all these things.

LXX Amos 9:11-12

Septuagint/OT in Greek

11 ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἀναστήσω τὴν σκηνὴν Δαυὶδ τὴν πεπτωκυῖαν καὶ ἀνοικοδομήσω τὰ πεπτωκότα αὐτῆς καὶ τὰ κατεσκαμμένα αὐτῆς ἀναστήσω καὶ ἀνοικοδομήσω αὐτὴν καθὼς αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ αἰῶνος, 

12 ὅπως ἐκζητήσωσιν οἱ κατάλοιποι τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, ἐφ᾿ οὓς ἐπικέκληται τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπ᾿ αὐτούς, λέγει Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ὁ ποιῶν πάντα ταῦτα.

My observation:

Amos 9:11-12 and Acts 15:16-18 aren’t word-for-word replicas. Luke paraphrases Amos to fit the context and message of the early Christian community. James is addressing the council about Gentiles being included in the church, using Amos’s prophecy to support his point. The focus is on the restoration and inclusion, even if the words aren’t an exact match. This exemplifies how Scripture can be adapted to convey timeless truths in different contexts. I assume Luke was quoting OT from LXX Septuagint. 

Müller argues that the LXX became the OT of the NT for the early church to an even greater extent than the Biblia Hebraica. He concludes, “For the New Testament authors, the original text, that is, the text they drew on, was primarily the Septuagint. (Müller, The First Bible of the Church, 116.)

Jobes wrote, "We cannot forget that the ancient Greek version of the Old Testament (Septuagint LXX) was nevertheless the Bible of the earliest Christian writers." (Jobes and Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, 9.)

The Septuagint scholar Sidney Jellicoe wrote, “He who would read the New Testament must know Koiné; but he who would understand the New Testament must know the LXX.” (Sidney Jellicoe, “Septuagint Studies in the Current Century,” JBL 88 (1968): 199.)

 

My conclusion:

In term of choosing a good Bible Version. For academic study, go for word-for-word translations (like the New American Standard Bible) offer close adherence to original texts. But for everyday reading and application, thought-for-thought translations (like the NIV or New Living Translation) can be more accessible and engaging. Ultimately, the goal is to convey the essence of the message in a way that resonates and inspires. It's a balance between fidelity to the original and clarity for the modern reader. 

I hope we could come to conclusion that since Luke did not quote the Old Testament word for word, not word by word in his writing in NT; therefore, we should not expect modern Bible translators to do the same. We should not assert that the KJV is the most and only accurate Bible translation. The NIV, like Luke's translation of the OT, might be received as God's word.

Index of Jesus’ quotations in the Gospels

Index of Jesus’ quotations in the Gospels

Genesis

         1:27        Matt. 19:4; Mark 10:6

         2:24        Matt. 19:5; Mark 10:7

         5:2          Matt. 19:5; Mark 10:6

Exodus

         3:6*         Matt. 22:32; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37

         12:46      John 19:36

         20:12–16      Matt. 19:18–19; Mark 10:19; Luke 18:20

         20:12      Matt. 15:4; Mark 7:10

         20:13      Matt. 5:21

         20:14      Matt. 5:27

         21:17      Matt. 15:4; Mark 7:10

         21:24      Matt. 5:38

Leviticus

         19:12      Matt. 5:33

         19:18      Matt. 5:43; 19:19; 22:39; Mark 12:31, 33; Luke 10:27

         24:20      Matt. 5:38

Numbers

         30:2      Matt. 5:33

Deuteronomy

         5:16      Matt. 15:4; Mark 7:10

         5:17      Matt. 5:21

         5:18      Matt. 5:27

         6:4–5    Mark 12:29–30

         6:5        Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30, 33; Luke 10:27

         6:13      Matt. 4:10; Luke 4:8

         6:16      Matt. 4:7; Luke 4:12

         8:3        Matt. 4:4; Luke 4:4

         19:15    Matt. 18:16

         19:21    Matt. 5:38

         24:1–3  Matt. 5:31; 19:7; Mark 10:4

Psalms

         8:2        Matt. 21:16

         22:1      Matt. 27:46; Mark 15:34

         31:5      Luke 23:46

         35:19    John 15:25

         41:9      John 13:18

         69:4      John 15:25

         69:9      John 2:17

         78:2      Matt. 13:35

         78:24    John 6:31

         82:6      John 10:34

         91:11–12      Matt. 4:6; Luke 4:10–11

         110:1     Matt. 22:44; 26:64; Mark 12:36; 14:62; Luke 20:42–43

         118:22   Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17

         118:23   Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:11

         118:26   Matt. 23:39; Luke 13:35

Isaiah

         6:9–10  Matt. 13:14–15; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10

         29:13    Matt. 15:8–9; Mark 7:6–7

         53:12    Luke 22:37

         54:13    John 6:45

         56:7      Matt. 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46

         61:1      Matt. 11:5; Luke 7:22

         61:1–2  Luke 4:18–19

Jeremiah

         7:11      Matt. 21:13; Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46

Daniel

         7:13      Matt. 24:30; 26:64; Mark 13:26; 14:62; Luke 21:27; 22:69

Hosea

         6:6        Matt. 9:13; 12:7

         10:8      Luke 23:30

Jonah

         1:17      Matt. 12:40

Micah

         7:6        Matt. 10:21, 35–36; Luke 12:53

Zechariah

         13:7      Matt. 26:31; Mark 14:27

Malachi

         3:1        Matt. 11:10; Luke 7:27

JESUS QUOTED THE OLD TESTAMENT, BUT NOT VERBATIM, AND NOT WORD FOR WORD. HE SOMETIMES TRANSLATE THESE BIBLE VERSES LOOSELY. OTHER NEW TESTAMENT AUTHORS LIKE PAUL AND PETER TOO QUOTED THE OLD TESTEMENT NOT WORD FOR WORD.

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM JESUS, PAUL AND PETER WHEN CHOOSING BIBLE VERSIONS?

Jesus did often paraphrase or interpret the Old Testament, emphasizing the spirit of the teachings rather than strict word-for-word accuracy. This shows us that the essence of the message matters more than rigid adherence to the exact text. When choosing Bible versions, it’s crucial to consider the version that resonates with your understanding and spiritual growth. The interpretation that speaks to your heart and enhances your relationship with the teachings can often be the most meaningful. It's about connecting with the deeper truths conveyed.

Versions like the New International Version (NIV), New Living Translation (NLT), and New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) aim for thought-for-thought equivalency rather than word-for-word precision. These translations focus on conveying the overall message in a way that's clear and relatable for contemporary readers, rather than sticking rigidly to the original language and structure. Each offers a unique lens through which to understand the deeper truths of the Bible. THAT IS WHY I PREFER BIBLE LIKE NIV, ESV...

Take Matthew 4:4 for example. In the King James Version (KJV), it’s written: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” In the New International Version (NIV), it reads: “Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.”

These translations convey the same core idea—spiritual sustenance is as important, if not more so, than physical sustenance. They capture the essence of the teaching, even if the wording differs slightly. It’s about the underlying truth, not the exact phrasing. 

AND BECAUSE OF THE CONFLICTS OF VERBAL PLENARY PRESERVATION IN THE BIBLE-PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, I HAVE STOP READING THE KJV AND AM THINKING OF THROWING IT!

The text of the LXX known to Matthew

The text of the LXX known to Matthew

On a number of occasions Matthew quotes a form of the text that differs from both the Hebrew text that has come down to us (Masoretic Text) and the LXX represented in the majority of manuscripts. This could be because he is modifying the text to make his point or that he is quoting from memory and makes mistakes. However, at least in some instances it appears that he is quoting from a version of the LXX that differs from the principal manuscripts. From the evidence of the Dead Sea Scrolls it would appear that there had been several attempts to revise the LXX text to bring it closer to the Hebrew text. In addition, we learn from the Scrolls that there were also variations in the Hebrew text, so that the question of what text Matthew was quoting from is extremely complicated. Given that we live in a period where there are countless English versions of the Bible, perhaps this should not be unduly surprising. (Moyise, Steve. 2010. Jesus and Scripture. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.)

For our reflection:

Matthew was reading LXX and Masoretic Text at the same time? He has two Old Testaments in his hands. One is the Hebrew OT and one is the Greek OT LXX. Clearly no one including Jesus, was pursuing a perfect Old Testament at Jesus' time? For an introduction to the issues, see Timothy R. McLay, The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003).

Lament over Bible-Presbyterian Church

“O Bible-Presbyterian Church, Bible-Presbyterian Church, the church that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would God has gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!

See, your house is left to you desolate.

For God tell you, you will not see God again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’”

Amen.

I pray that you will stop pursuing a Perfect Bible until you have hurt the Lord's heart. I also ask that you stop promoting the perfect TR underlying the KJV and the KJV as the most faithful English Bible. May God grant you grace, mercy, and peace, leading you back to the flock of the Almighty God. 

 

THE QUESTIONS OF IMPRECISE STATEMENTS, FREE QUOTATIONS, AND DESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE

It must be remembered that there is a difference between precision and truthfulness. To argue for the total truthfulness of Scripture is certainly not to argue for technical precision at every point, for a statement can be imprecise and still be completely true. Consider the following statements: (1) “My home is not far from my office.” (2) “My home is about one and a half miles from my office.” (3) “My home is 1.6 miles from my office.” All three statements are absolutely true (or “inerrant”). All three are completely free of falsehood; they contain no errors. Even though (3) is much more precise then (1), it is not more “true” than (1). Both (1) and (3) are completely true, even though they have different degrees of precision. (And a land surveyor could presumably make a statement that is even more precise than statement [3].)

Similar considerations apply to the matter of quotations. The statement “I said, ‘My home is not far from my office,’ ” would be a verbatim quotation of statement (1) above and the quotation would be completely true. But the statement “I said that I lived near my place of work,” though using several different words, would still be (in ordinary conversation at least) a perfectly acceptable and truthful report of what I had said.

In the Bible we sometimes find, for example, round numbers or approximations in measurements and in battle figures. These statements are not highly precise, but they can still be completely true. We also find in the New Testament quotations of the Old Testament or quotations of Jesus that are not verbatim quotations of the type we find in precise scholarly writing today, but that are closer to the kind of indirect quotation mentioned in the example above. Even though they do not report the exact words used, they faithfully represent the content of the person or text cited.

These instances of nontechnical reporting should not be urged as counterexamples that contradict the many texts that affirm the Bible’s total truthfulness, for they are merely instances of a lack of highly technical precision, not instances of falsehood or error. The emphasis of the many texts cited above is on the truthfulness of God’s speech in the Bible. No texts were found to claim any particular level of precision in measurement or any adherence to one certain style of quotation.

The question then arises, How imprecise can a statement be and still be true? In the example given above, the statement “My home is four miles from my office” would be false, as would the statement “I said that my home was very far from my office.” But between what would clearly be true and what would clearly be false there is a wide range of possible statements. The degree of imprecision that would be acceptable as “truthful” speech would vary according to the situation in which I was speaking, the degree of precision implied by my statements, and the degree of precision that would ordinarily be expected by my hearers in that particular context. It would be difficult to define in advance what degree of precision would be required in order for speech to be truthful, for one would need more information about each individual situation in question.

When we ask what degree of precision is necessary for biblical statements to be completely true, an analysis of individual texts in Scripture will be very helpful to us (see, for example, chapter 5 concerning the New Testament use of the Old Testament). We should not expect to find one particular level of precision throughout the whole Bible (such as “round off to the nearest hundred soldiers killed”) but degrees of precision that will vary according to the different kinds of purpose, subject matter, historical setting, and literary type that characterize the different parts of Scripture.

What is important for our purposes in this chapter is to emphasize the differences between imprecision and untruthfulness. In contemporary discussions about biblical “inerrancy” the question is not whether the Bible contains statements that lack technical precision (all agree that it does) but whether it contains clearly false affirmations (on this there is disagreement). There may be some texts about which some will say they contain not imprecision but actual falsehood, while others will say they contain only imprecision. Those cases will have to be dealt with on an individual basis. (In most cases these are not the really crucial texts in the “inerrancy” discussion anyway.) My purpose here is only to point out the difference between precision and truthfulness and to emphasize that it is the total truthfulness of Scripture that is affirmed again and again in Scripture itself.

...In summary, it is important to note that the Bible repeatedly affirms its own truthfulness, but that this affirmation does not imply a claim to a very high level of precision or to a practice of verbatim quotation or to the possession of future scientific knowledge. These elements are not essential to complete truthfulness in speech and writing. 

Adapted from Carson, D. A., and John D. Woodbridge. 1992. Scripture and Truth. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

For our reflection:

The essence here is that truth can be nuanced. It’s not necessarily about having perfect precision or adhering strictly to verbatim quotes. Truthfulness is more about the broader, genuine intent and integrity behind the message. In a way, it’s like conveying the spirit of the law rather than the letter. This approach to truth allows for a deeper, more flexible understanding, especially when interpreting ancient texts like the Bible that were written in contexts very different from our own. What is your thoughts?

Brother, Sister Relationship Over VPP

Brother, Sister Relationship Over VPP

By Rev Tan Eng Boo

In 2022 I travelled with my two sisters and my wife to Turkey. One of the biblical sites we visited was Hattusa. It is about a three hour drive from Ankara. The distance is 197 KM. Hattusa was the capital city of the Hittite Empire in the late Bronze age. The Hittites were an Ancient Anatolian people who established an empire centred on Hattusa in north-central Anatolia around 1600 BC. The city was destroyed, together with the Hittite state itself, around 1200 BC.

I am glad that I was able to accompany my two sisters to visit my nephew’s workplace in Ankara. This would be my sister, Ivy’s, last overseas trip. She went home to be with the Lord on Friday 17 May, 2024. In my testimony at the two nights of vigil service held in Calvary Pandan BPC, I wanted people to know that my sister was a fervent servant of the Lord. I also wanted people to know that we remained a family unit in spite of our differences in Bible version. She was for the King James Only, VPP position. VPP stands for Verbal Plenary Preservation. It simply means that God preserved only one Bible for the English-speaking world, and that is the King James Version (KJV). The basis of this belief is that God has preserved certain Greek Manuscripts underlining the KJV. The B-P Church in Singapore went through a traumatic experience during that period, resulting in family members not talking to one another and not worshipping together.

My family

There are seven of us siblings, two girls and five boys, of which Ivy is the eldest and I am the youngest in the family. We have a 12-year age gap. In her younger days she was a very fervent Christian who was constantly reading her Bible. The Lord used her as His instrument in starting a Bible study group in the Pasir Panjang Community Centre in 1960. I recalled being with her for this Bible study. This was to be the pioneering group of Galilee BPC.

In 1962, Ivy was called to the Lord’s work. She was one of the first students in the Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC) which was started in the same year. Fast forward to 1975, I was also called to the Lord’s work and I studied in FEBC that year.

My father was very happy to see his eldest daughter and youngest son in the service of the Lord. He was most happy when he witnessed my Ordination in October 1981 by the Bible-Presbyterian Synod in Life BPC.

I want to encourage Christian parents to be open and willing to offer their children to full-time Christian service.

Our relationship

We never let the VPP issue break up our brother-sister relationship. She would come to my home on Saturdays before my grandchildren were born and she would be us the whole day. My wife and I would bring her out for lunch or shopping. The most memorable time we had together was the Turkey trip in 2022. Praise the Lord.

I mentioned this matter in my testimony because I know of families who have broken up and are not on talking terms over the VPP issue. This is not the way Christians should behave.

If anyone is going through this issue with your family members, do not let it break up your family unit.

I read the English Standard Version (ESV). We don’t fight over this version. I know she loves her KJV Bible. We don’t thumb each other down.

Will I see my sister Ivy in heaven because I differ with her on Bible version? YES! 

 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” (Rom 10:13)

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another:          

just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. 

By this all people will know that you are my disciples, 

if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34, 35)

Our weapon to combat heretics

 2 Corinthians 10:4

The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.

It's essential to remember that the battle isn't about physical or aggressive confrontations. Instead, it's about using spiritual tools: prayer, Scripture, and sound doctrine.

Standing firm in truth, fostering a spirit of love and understanding, and gently correcting false teachings with grace and wisdom reflect the true essence of this verse. Engaging in compassionate dialogue and educating others on the correct interpretations can be far more effective than any combative approach.

SPIRITUAL TERRORISM IN BIBLE-PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH

 SPIRITUAL TERRORISM

A Warning!
by a B-P pastor.

It exists in the church today! Today we hear of Islamic terrorism and the extremism of Al-Qaeda on how they would go to the extent of killing their fellow Muslims. As I reflect on this matter, it dawn on me that we are seeing such extremism in the church, too. The recent conflict that split certain B-P Churches was over the extreme belief that the King James Versions (KJV) is the inspired, God preserved version for the English-speaking world. Some of these extremists (B-P pastors) condemned their fellow B-P pastors who disagree with them. Name callings, like neo-evangelicals, neo-fundamentalists were labeled against those pastors who were not in agreement with them. Such pastors were treated like an enemy. Spiritual terrorism is extremism. It is extremism that will not tolerate anyone who is not with/for them. They will go all out to fight anyone who disagrees with them.

Be careful of extremists. Be wary of them. They are merciless. They will only want to build their own empire. They will fight and destroy anyone who comes in their way.

Once the Devil was walking along with one of his cohorts. They saw a man ahead of them pick up something shiny.

"What did he find?" asked the cohort.
"A piece of the truth," the Devil replied.
"Doesn't it bother you that he found a piece of the truth?" asked the cohort.
"No," said the Devil, "I will see to it that he makes a religion out of it."

To these people they have found the 'truth' and have made a religion out of it.

If you have seen a recent TV program on CNN: "In the Footsteps of bin Laden" you would know how dangerous extremists could be. They will kill those who are even their own fellow Muslims. In spiritual terrorism, the Christians, may not kill physically but they will split churches and cause fellow Christians to fight one another. Parents and children, husband and wife attend different churches because of the KJV issue. It is so destructive.

Be wary of such extremists. They hold on to the KJV-ONLY position. They believe in the perfect Bible which they say is the King James Version/Bible. They will not allow anyone to read any other Bible versions other than the KJV only. To them, all other Bible versions present a different Jesus from their KJV Jesus. All other Bible versions are corrupt. Only the KJV is the Perfect Bible. They will tell you that God has preserved the KJV. The KJV is the Bible that should be the sole guiding principle for all Bible translations, including all other ethnic Bibles (like the Chinese, Malay, Tamil language Bibles etc.). This is not only extremism, but also leaning heavily towards a heretical and cultic behaviour. Be forewarned of such groups in the B-P Church today.

Do not allow such extreme teaching to infiltrate Grace Church. Be on guard against them. I am not for such teaching. I am against such form of extremism. Some B-P Churches that were affected recently have been devastated by internal strife and split in the congregation.

We live in perilous times. Be careful of them. 2 Timothy 4: 3-4:

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine but, after their own lusts, shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall turned into fables"

 

For our reflection:

The focus is that spiritually, Jetfree Kh.00, Quak Suane Yew, Pra-bud-ass Kosi and their proxies or cronies are not superior to Hamas, Hezbollah, or ISIS. Think about it. 

Open letter to Calvary Pandan Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore

This is an open letter to the redeemed of the Lamb of God, even our Saviour Jesus Christ

              From the outset, I must state that I do not wish to delve with the VPP controversy which is not profitable to the members of the pews other than a passing remark of the afflictions which VPP has inflicted on the church and her testimony. My main intent herein is on "faith and practice", "truth and duty" and " word and conduct" of every Session member (present and past) be he a pastor, an elder or a deacon. 

A.       THE VPP CONTROVERSY IN CALVARY PANDAN (IN SUMMARY)

1.      The VPP as taught by FEBC and brought into Pandan By Rev Quek in 2002 had generated strives, disputes, confusions and divisions in the church. He had made a non-issue into an issue which had caused untold damage to the testimony of the church.  Prior to the entry of VPP into Calvary Pandan in 2002/2003, we had peace and unity, happiness and contentment, serving the Lord with great joy and thanksgivings for the salvation of our soul. But look at what had happened to the church since the VPP controversy came into Pandan? Beside unrest, The VPP issue had ushered in  more harm than good, more heat than light, more deceits than truth.  Had the leaders (in particular, Rev Quek) obediently abided with the "Calvary Pandan B-P Church's Final Statement on the KJB" of 9 May 2004 the Church would have remained in peace, harmony and unity, to this day, without going through all the set backs, heartaches, tears and sorrows which had inflicted on many families.

2.    In the BOE's Final Statement on KJB of 9 May 2004, MT & RT were unanimously affirmed as "the most trustworthy, accurate, and providential preserved copies of the inspired Holy Scriptures, accepted by Bible scholars of the Reformation and conservative scholars of the Protestant Church"  The faithful obedience to this Statement would have preserved the peace and unity of Calvary Pandan to this day. But sad to recall that the pastors, having approved of it, had failed to strictly comply with it.

3.     The only way to peace and unity in Calvary Pandan and with the Chinese Session is the return to this Statement of 9 May 2004. In this Statement the leadership of the Chinese Session and the reliability of the CUV Bible used for preaching and teaching was never questioned. Why then is the BOE and Rev Quek attacking the Chinese leadership for upholding the Statement of 9 May 2004? On what authority is he calling Rev Tang names?

4.      I am no theologian and I do not wish to delve with the VPP issue. What I will say is that VPP is not a "life and death" issue for the salvation of  all the faithful believers in Pandan. "For by grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8). I reiterate my believe in the aged old doctrine in Article 4.1, 4.2, 4.2.1  of the Church Constitution. I believe the Word of God is perfect, inerrant and infallible. It has no mistakes.I love the KJV bible for it is the best and faithful translation for doctrine and conduct. My believe on them are sufficient and complete for the inheritance of my eternal life. Equipped with this unfeigned faith in God and His everlasting Word, the truly born again believers will meet the Lord God, one day. For these redeemed, they do not need more than this simple faith and trust in God. The Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ will carry them through in all circumstances, come shine or rain,  joy or afflictions, till they see Christ, face to face.

B.   ON WORD AND CONDUCT, EVEN TRUTH AND TRANSPARENCY

3.     Beside faith in God, our words and deeds are equally important for our salvation. Having purity of doctrine without purity of conduct our faith in God will be in vain.  Without purity of words and conduct, even honesty, no one can be called the child of God, even though he has all the VPP in him. Faith and practice (word and conduct), truth and duty (honesty and transparency)  must go hand in hand.  Article 5.4 of the Church Constitution says and I quote:

"Truth leads to goodness; the great touchstone of truth is its tendency to promote holiness;  according to our Saviour's rule, "by their fruits ye shall have them.; No opinion can be either more pernicious or more absurd than that which brings truth and falsehood upon a level and represents it as of no consequence what a man's opinions are. On the contrary, we are persuaded that there is an inseparable connection between faith and practice, truth and duty; otherwise it would be of no consequence either to discover truth to embrace it."

4.      Can any pastor, elder, deacon or member in Pandan claim he or she is "perfect and upright and one that fear God and eschewed evil?" (Job 1:1) Can anyone say he or she has never lied or distorted the truth or uttered untruth?  Events which unfolded in recent years in Pandan are evidence of much distortions, lies and untruths before our eyes. God knows who are the peace-breakers and liars. Know ye that "the eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good." (Prov 15:3). ".. the ways of man are before the eyes of the Lord, and he pondereth all his goings" (Prov 5:21)  Hear what the Lord has to say to us: "The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the Lord search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings." (Jer 17:9-10). Therefore, take heed of the wrath of God and His soon coming judgment. None can escape it unless he mends his wayward ways and repent of his self-righteousness while the Lord tarries in His coming to us.

5.    Shouting and turf fighting on the new doctrine of  "VPP-KJVism" are of no value or benefit to our souls without purity in words and conduct. What the church leaders need to day is soul searching before God in true repentance of their self-righteousness. Make peace with one another while there is time! For the Lord cometh soon to judge our works (words and conduct). Let no leader in Calvary Pandan be heard of the Lord saying to him, "I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity." (Matt 7:23)

In His grace and mercy

Elder Joshua Lim

L.LB (Hons) - founding elder and trustee of Calvary Bible-Presbyterian Church since 1973.

3 Ways to Graciously Engage KJV-Only Believers July 26, 2018 | Mark Ward

Don Carson pled with them for realism 40 years ago, and James White urged them to trust modern translations 20 years ago. But I sense that conservative evangelicalism has now given up on critiquing King James Version-onlyism.

But there are tens or perhaps even hundreds of thousands of KJV-only Christians around the world, and a new generation is taking leadership in the movement.

It’s time to make another gentle appeal.

But what else can be said? I urge a threefold strategy focused on English translation, not Greek textual criticism. This is the best way to love—and persuade—our KJV-only brothers and sisters.

1. Listen and Understand

KJV-only views tend to fall between two poles. One extreme makes strident claims for the absolute perfection of the KJV, viewing it as the perfect product of divine (re)inspiration. The other pole prefers the KJV out of an aesthetic sense or the belief that valuable, unifying traditions shouldn’t be given up lightly.

More than likely, the KJV-only brothers and sisters you’ll run into are between these poles: they’re part of the mainstream King-James-only movement—which means, if you’ll listen to them, you’ll find they’re not technically KJV-only.

The mainstream KJV-only movement insists that its ultimate concern is not actually the KJV. It’s the full “preservation” of the Greek and Hebrew texts from which the KJV was translated, namely the Masoretic Hebrew Text and the Greek Textus Receptus, or “TR.” KJV-onlyism is actually, officially, TR-onlyism.

Evangelical biblical scholarship looks at all the differences among Greek New Testament manuscripts and, in textual criticism, takes up the complicated challenge of culling out copyist errors. KJV-onlyism looks at those same differences and feels them to be a threat to the stability of Christian faith. So it adopts the TR and rejects modern textual criticism.

2. Don’t Talk about Textual Criticism

I suggest you take a step back: you must refuse to talk about textual criticism with KJV-only Christians.

I’m not saying it’s worthless to teach the truth on the topic; many writers have done so admirably. But now’s probably not the time.

God calls few Christians, KJV-only or not, to learn Koine Greek. This means comparatively few people on any side of the KJV debate have ever examined the evidence. Instead, most people in the church have formed their textual critical views secondhand from authorities they trust. This is natural and not necessarily bad: we all outsource complex judgments to people whose expertise we would have trouble proving exactly.

This means your disagreement with the average KJV defender is not actually about textual criticism, but about which authorities are worth trusting: Carson vs. Ruckman, White vs. Waite. You won’t get him to trust responsible authors by having him read their attacks on his viewpoint; you’ll do this by giving him other edifying books by those who’ve produced our modern evangelical Bible translations, hoping he’ll sense intuitively that they are not his enemies. This is your long game.

But your short game needs to give up on textual criticism. As Dan Wallace has labored to show, only a tiny percentage of textual differences are both meaningful and viable. The difference between “the star came to rest” over baby Jesus and “the star came and stood” over him is not worth a fight.

Graciously agree to disagree with a KJV devotee’s preference for the TR and move on.

3. Talk about English Only

Most laypersons do not need to understand the canons of Greek New Testament textual criticism. But here’s something every KJV reader ought to know: Elizabethan English is no longer fully intelligible, and 1 Corinthians 14 tells us explicitly and repeatedly that intelligibility is necessary for edification.

If with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air (1 Cor. 14:9).

Even KJV extremists know it contains “dead words” and obsolete phrases no longer present in the real-life lexical stock of English speakers. We just don’t say or write “amerce,” “bolled,” or “crisping pin.” They are unintelligible, and contemporary dictionaries are hit or miss on these dead words. These are words we know we don’t know.

But there is another category of unintelligible words hiding in plain sight, and the KJV-only movement needs some help seeing them: words we don’t know we don’t know.

These “false friends” are the focus of the strategy that I lay out in Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible. Such words—and syntactical structures and punctuation conventions—trip up today’s readers through no fault of the KJV translators or of today’s readers, but solely because of language change.

Translators could not have predicted the future of words like “halt” and “remove” and “commend,” and English speakers today shouldn’t be held responsible to notice how these words have evolved over the past four centuries. William Tyndale died to give God’s Word to the “plough boy,” not to the specialist in historical Englishes.

Beautiful Translation

Of course, the KJV is not entirely unintelligible. And it surely is beautiful. I have always enjoyed the challenge of reading it. When I encourage my brothers and sisters in Christ to cease insisting on the use of the KJV, I do so, as my favorite linguist John McWhorter said of Shakespeare, “not because we are uncultured or incapable of effort, but because language is always moving.”

If the point of Bible reading were Anglophilic enculturation or Early Modern English decoding practice, then giving people KJVs would be ideal. But if the point is understanding what God said, then people should be given the Bible in their English, not someone else’s.

KJV-onlyism is not a Christian liberty issue, like eating meat offered to idols. It makes void the Word of God by human tradition—one archaizing lexeme at a time (Mark 7:13). I pray that my brethren’s consciences will one day be liberated to read more than just the KJV.

But consciences should not be treated lightly, even when misinformed. The safest way to push people past the unsound objections of their consciences is to appeal directly to God’s Word and let his Spirit illuminate it for them.

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14 that edification requires intelligibility. This needs to be the united Christian answer to the many people adversely affected by KJV-onlyism.

Mark Ward (PhD, Bob Jones University) is the editor of Bible Study Magazine and author of its back-page column, Word Nerd: Language and the Bible. He is the author of Authorized: The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible (Lexham Press, 2018), which became a Faithlife infotainment documentary. He is also the host of the Bible Study Magazine Podcast and is an active YouTuber.

Modern translations

Is the abundance of translations and paraphrases an indication that we cannot rely on our current English Bible to proclaim God's real message? Perhaps the following quote from Sir Frederic Kenyon, director of the British Museum, will best answer your question: “It is reassuring at the end to find that the general result of all these discoveries and all this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our conviction that we have in our hands, in substantial integrity, the veritable Word of God.” (Sir Frederick Kenyon, The Story of the Bible, 1968.)

Essentially, Sir Frederic Kenyon's statement underlines that extensive research and discoveries have only reinforced the authenticity and reliability of the Scriptures. This perspective extends to modern Bible translations, which are meticulously crafted to maintain the integrity and essence of the original texts. Scholars and theologians work diligently to ensure that these translations accurately convey the meaning and message of the original manuscripts. Thus, modern translations are widely accepted as the Word of God, as they are seen to faithfully represent the Scriptures in their substantial integrity.

The King James Version (KJV) has been a cornerstone for many believers, cherished for its majestic language and historical significance. However, the essence of Scripture isn't confined to the 1611 translation alone.

Modern translations aim to communicate the Word of God effectively to contemporary audiences. Scholars meticulously translate from the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts to preserve the intended message. The fidelity of these translations to the original manuscripts strengthens the case for their acceptance as the Word of God.

While the KJV remains a profound literary and spiritual touchstone, modern translations reflect ongoing discoveries in biblical scholarship. They provide clarity and understanding, ensuring the Scriptures remain accessible and meaningful for all believers. The ultimate goal is to convey the veritable Word of God, in which modern translations undeniably play a pivotal role.

Pursuing a perfect Bible translation is like chasing the horizon—noble, but inherently elusive. Language is fluid and ever-evolving, and each translation strives to balance literal accuracy with readability and cultural context. Instead of seeking perfection, the goal should be faithfulness to the original texts and conveying the intended message as clearly as possible.

The beauty of different translations lies in offering diverse perspectives and insights, enriching our understanding of the Scriptures. So, while perfection may be unattainable, striving for a profound and faithful representation remains vital. What’s your take on this? Do you have a preferred version?

I'd advise Jeffrey Khoo, Quek Suan Yew, Prabudas Koshy to appreciate the beauty and complexity of language and translation. Verbal Plenary Preservation advocates the belief that every word of the Scriptures is divinely inspired and preserved. It’s an admirable commitment, but striving for a “perfect” translation might overlook the reality that languages evolve, and interpretations can vary.

Encourage Jeffrey Khoo, Quek Suan Yew, Prabudas Koshy to consider that modern translations are crafted with immense care, aiming to remain faithful to the original texts. Rather than fixating on a single perfect version, embracing the richness of multiple translations can offer deeper understanding and insights into the divine message.

Ultimately, the goal should be to convey the core truths and teachings of the Scriptures, allowing them to resonate meaningfully with diverse audiences. It’s about capturing the essence, not just the exact wording.

I hope we can quit pursuing a perfect Bible.

By Reverend So and So