Our Statement

In Bible-Presbyterian Church, the Bible is considered to be inspired by God and is central to worship and teaching. However, the Church acknowledges that the Bible was written by human authors in different times, places, and languages, which means that it is not a single, uniform document. Instead, it is a collection of diverse writings, including history, poetry, law, prophecy, and letters.

The Bible-Presbyterian Church does not claim that any single translation of the Bible is perfect or without error. Instead, it recognizes a variety of translations as being authorized for use, each offering different insights and perspectives. Some of these translations include the King James Version, the New Revised Standard Version, and the Revised English Bible, among others.

The term "TR" usually refers to the Textus Receptus, a Greek text of the New Testament that has been the basis for several translations, including the King James Version. While the Textus Receptus has historical significance, it is not considered "perfect" in the sense of being without error or beyond improvement. Scholars continue to study ancient manuscripts to gain a better understanding of the original texts.

We encourages engaging with the Bible through study and interpretation, guided by the Holy Spirit, to understand its meaning and relevance for our lives today.

Bible Preservation

The question of whether we have a "perfect" text of Scripture, such as the Textus Receptus (TR), and whether God has preserved His Word "on paper," touches on theology, history, and the nature of divine revelation. Let’s address this step by step, emphasizing why Christians can trust Scripture and why all translations—when faithfully rendered—invite us into the living, eternal Word of God.

 

1. What is the "Perfect TR"? Why Some Argue for It

The Textus Receptus (Latin for "Received Text") refers to a Greek New Testament compilation used as the basis for many early Protestant translations, including the King James Version (KJV). Some argue it represents a "perfect" preservation of the original biblical text. However, modern textual criticism reveals that the TR is based on later medieval manuscripts (Byzantine text-type) and contains minor scribal additions or variations not found in older, earlier manuscripts like the Codex Sinaiticus or Vaticanus. These older manuscripts, discovered centuries after the TR’s creation, have refined our understanding of the New Testament text. Thus, while the TR is valuable, it is not "perfect" in the sense of being identical to the original autographs (first writings).

Key point: No single manuscript or textual tradition (e.g., TR, Alexandrian, Byzantine) is flawless, but God’s sovereign oversight ensures the message of Scripture remains intact across all traditions.

 

2. The Word of God is "Living and Active" (Hebrews 4:12)

Scripture’s divine authority does not depend on human perfection in transmission. The Bible itself declares:

 

"The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever" (Isaiah 40:8).

 

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away" (Matthew 24:35).

 

God’s Word is "living" because it is empowered by the Holy Spirit to transform lives (John 6:63). Even with minor textual variations (e.g., spelling differences, word order), the core truths—about God, salvation, and Christ—remain consistent across all reliable translations.

 

3. Does God Preserve His Word "On Paper"?

Yes, but not through a single manuscript or translation. Preservation is seen in:

 

Providential Care: God oversaw the copying and transmission process across millennia. While human errors occurred (e.g., scribal mistakes), no essential doctrine is compromised.

 

Textual Criticism: Scholars compare thousands of manuscripts to reconstruct the original text with remarkable accuracy. Over 99% of the New Testament text is confirmed with certainty; the remaining uncertainties (e.g., Mark 16:9–20, John 7:53–8:11) do not affect core theology.

 

Multiplicity of Witnesses: The Bible’s survival through persecution, censorship, and time testifies to divine preservation.

 

Example: The resurrection of Jesus is attested in every major manuscript tradition, translation, and church creed. No variation undermines it.

 

4. Why Read the Bible in Any Translation?

God’s Word transcends language barriers. Translations are tools to make Scripture accessible:

 

Formal Equivalence (e.g., ESV, NASB): Prioritizes word-for-word accuracy.

 

Dynamic Equivalence (e.g., NIV, NLT): Focuses on thought-for-thought clarity.

 

Paraphrase (e.g., The Message): Captures the Bible’s spirit in modern idioms.

 

All faithful translations convey the gospel, God’s character, and His will. The Holy Spirit uses even imperfect human efforts to reveal truth (2 Timothy 3:16–17).

 

5. Addressing Concerns About "Errors"

Minor textual variations (e.g., "love for God" vs. "love for Christ" in John 21:15–17) do not alter Scripture’s infallible message. The Bible’s inerrancy applies to the original writings (autographs), not later copies. Yet, its infallibility (trustworthiness for salvation and teaching) remains intact in all reliable translations.

 

6. Practical Encouragement: Read the Bible!

Focus on the Central Message: The Bible’s unity points to Christ (Luke 24:27). Whether you read the KJV, NIV, or another translation, the gospel shines through.

 

Trust God’s Faithfulness: If God can use a donkey to speak truth (Numbers 22:28), He can use any translation to transform hearts.

 

Seek the Spirit’s Guidance: "The Helper, the Holy Spirit, will teach you all things" (John 14:26).

 

Conclusion

We don’t have a "perfect" manuscript or translation, but we have a perfectly faithful God who preserves His Word’s integrity. The Bible’s power lies not in ink and paper but in its divine Author, who ensures its message endures "forever settled in heaven" (Psalm 119:89). Read it, study it, and let the living Word draw you closer to Christ—no matter the translation.

Start today: Open the Bible in your language. Let its eternal truths renew your mind (Romans 12:2) and lead you to the One who is "the Word made flesh" (John 1:14).

 

Do We Have a Perfect Bible?

Perfect? No. Reliable? Yes.

No single "perfect" manuscript exists — all have variants.

But due to thousands of manuscripts, textual criticism reconstructs the NT with ~99% confidence.

Modern critical editions (like Nestle-Aland and UBS) reflect the best scholarly consensus on the original texts.

A Call to Unity and Humility: An Exhortation to Bible Teachers - Pastor So

To Jeffrey Khoo, Quek Suan Yew, Prabhudas Koshy and others in Far Eastern Bible College, Singapore,

As those entrusted with teaching God’s Word, we bear a sacred responsibility to steward truth with wisdom, grace, and reverence. Yet I write to you today with urgency, compelled by Scripture and the Spirit, to address a growing fracture among us: quarrels over words, translations, and secondary doctrines that have divided the body of Christ. Let us heed Paul’s warning:

---

1. “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved… correctly handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15, NIV)

Before we demand perfection in others, we must first be “approved workers” before God. Approval comes not from rigid adherence to a single translation (e.g., KJV-onlyism) or textual theory (e.g., “Perfect TR”), but from humility, integrity, and faithfulness to the gospel. Quarreling over words (2 Timothy 2:14) distracts from our mission and ruins those who listen. Are we building up the church or tearing it down?

---

2. “Avoid foolish controversies” (Titus 3:9, NIV)

Debates over textual variants, translation philosophies, or speculative genealogies (Titus 3:9) are “unprofitable and useless.” While textual criticism has its place, elevating it to a test of orthodoxy breeds pride and division. The Word of God is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12)—whether in NIV, ESV, NASB, or other faithful translations. To insist that only one version is “God’s preserved Word” risks idolizing human methods over God’s sovereign power to speak through His living Word.

---

3. “See to it… that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart” (Hebrews 3:12, NIV)

Brothers and sisters, when we divide churches over secondary issues like translation preferences, we risk hardening hearts and driving people away from the “living God.” The New Covenant is not about ink on paper but God’s law written on hearts (Hebrews 8:10). Let us major on what unites us: Christ’s redeeming blood, the Spirit’s work, and the call to holiness.

---

4. “How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished…?” (Hebrews 10:29, NIV)

To attack fellow believers over translation choices—treating modern versions as “unholy” or “corrupt”—is to insult the Spirit of grace who dwells in all God’s children. Such behavior mirrors the Pharisees’ legalism, not Christ’s compassion. Remember: God judges His people first (Hebrews 10:30). Let us tremble at the thought of harming His flock.

---

5. “Not many of you should become teachers… we will be judged more strictly” (James 3:1, NIV)

Teachers, your platform is not a throne but a cross. When you grumble against those who read NIV (James 5:9), swear by “Dean Burgon Oath” (James 5:12), or demand a “perfect Bible” (1 Peter 1:25), you usurp God’s role as Judge (James 4:12). We all stumble (James 3:2). Instead of policing others, examine your own heart: Is it marked by “bitter envy and selfish ambition” (James 3:14) or “wisdom from heaven” (James 3:17)?

---

6. “Be doers of the Word” (James 1:22, NIV)

The church needs fewer critics and more doers. A “perfect law” (James 1:25) is not about flawless manuscripts but the transformative power of obedience. Does your teaching produce “peacemakers who sow in peace” (James 3:18) or factions that split churches (James 4:1)? Stop judging fellow believers (James 4:11) and start loving them (1 Peter 2:17).

---

7. “Respect everyone… fear God” (1 Peter 2:17, NIV)

God’s Word endures forever (1 Peter 1:25), but our interpretations are finite. Approach difficult texts (2 Peter 3:16) with humility, not dogmatism. Teach “the very words of God” (1 Peter 4:11), not personal biases. Lead as examples (1 Peter 5:3), not lords. And flee the spirit of the “false teachers” (2 Peter 2:1) who peddle division as piety.

---

A Final Plea

Beloved, the world watches as we bicker over footnotes while orphans go unfed and souls perish. Let us repent of pride, lay down our swords, and unite around the gospel. Modern translations are tools, not idols. The “perfect” Bible is the one that transforms sinners into saints—and that work belongs to the Spirit, not our polemics.

May we heed James’ warning: “Don’t grumble… The Judge is standing at the door!” (James 5:9). Let us stand before Him not as Pharisees clutching our preferred texts, but as servants who loved His sheep, preached His grace, and left the rest to Him.

For the sake of the Bride,

An Ordained Pastor So And So

 

---

Scripture quotations taken from the NIV.

 

The Hexapla vs Verbal Plenary Preservation and KJVonlyism

The Hexapla (Greek for "sixfold") was a monumental scholarly work compiled by Origen of Alexandria (c. 185–254 AD). It was one of the most ambitious textual projects in early Christian history, designed to compare different versions of the Old Testament. Its importance lies in several key areas:

1. Purpose: Resolving Textual Discrepancies

   - Early Christians (who mostly used the Greek Septuagint/LXX) debated with Jews (who used the Hebrew Masoretic text) over scriptural accuracy.

   - Origen noticed differences between the Hebrew Bible and the Greek LXX, leading to disputes over prophecies (e.g., Isaiah 7:14’s "virgin" vs. "young woman").

   - The Hexapla was created to compare multiple versions side-by-side, helping scholars determine the most reliable readings.

2. Structure: A Comparative Bible in Six Columns

   The Hexapla arranged the Old Testament in six parallel columns:

   1. Hebrew Text (original consonantal Hebrew)  

   2. Hebrew Transliterated into Greek Letters (for Greek-speaking readers)  

   3. Aquila’s Greek Translation (ultra-literal Jewish version, 2nd century AD)  

   4. Symmachus’ Greek Translation (more readable Jewish-Greek version, 2nd century AD)  

   5. Septuagint (LXX) (the standard Greek OT, with Origen’s editorial marks)  

   6. Theodotion’s Greek Translation (a revised LXX-like Jewish version, 2nd century AD)  

   - Later, Origen reportedly added three more columns (Quinta, Sexta, Septima) for other Greek versions, making some sections Tetrapla (4-column) or Octapla (8-column).

3. Key Contributions and Importance

A. Textual Criticism & Preservation

   - The Hexapla was the first major comparative Bible, predating modern critical editions by over a millennium.

   - Origen marked differences between the LXX and Hebrew with symbols (e.g., asterisks [※] for LXX additions, obeli [÷] for Hebrew omissions).

   - This helped scholars track variations, influencing later translations like Jerome’s Vulgate.

B. Bridge Between Jewish & Christian Scholarship

   - Since Jews had largely abandoned the LXX (due to its Christian use), Origen’s inclusion of Jewish Greek versions (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion) preserved alternative translations.

   - It became a key resource for Christian-Jewish debates over Messianic prophecies.

C. Influence on Later Bible Translations

   - Jerome used the Hexapla for his Latin Vulgate, especially for the Psalms (leading to the Gallican Psalter).

   - Early Syriac and Coptic translations also referenced it.

   - Modern critical editions (e.g., Göttingen Septuagint) still rely on Hexaplaric readings.

D. Insights into Lost Texts

   - Some columns (e.g., Aquila, Symmachus) survive only through the Hexapla’s fragments.

   - It provides clues about pre-Masoretic Hebrew texts, since the Dead Sea Scrolls later confirmed some LXX readings over the Masoretic text.

4. Limitations & Challenges

   - No complete copy survives—only fragments in later writings (e.g., Eusebius, Jerome) and palimpsests.

   - Origen’s editorial marks sometimes corrupted the LXX by forcing it to align with the Hebrew.

   - The sheer size (likely 50+ volumes) made copying impractical, leading to its eventual disappearance.

5. Legacy

   - The Hexapla was a pioneering work of biblical scholarship, setting the stage for textual criticism.

   - It remains a crucial resource for understanding the transmission of the Old Testament in antiquity.

   - Modern scholars still study its remnants to reconstruct early Bible versions.

Observations:

The Hexapla, compiled by Origen in the 3rd century, serves as a critical tool for understanding the textual history of the Old Testament. By juxtaposing six versions (Hebrew text, Greek transliteration, Septuagint, and translations by Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion), it highlights textual variations and the early church’s acknowledgment of discrepancies. This comparative work undermines claims of a singular, “perfect” biblical text, as it demonstrates that early Christians actively engaged with multiple textual traditions. Here’s how this contrasts with Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) and KJV Onlyism:

1. The Hexapla reflects a commitment to textual criticism, not an assumption of flawless preservation.
2. The Hexapla’s documented variations challenge VPP’s claim of perfect textual continuity. If God providentially preserved every word, the need for Origen’s comparative analysis—or the existence of divergent traditions like the LXX and MT—becomes difficult to reconcile.
3. Origen’s inclusion of non-MT texts undermines the idea that one tradition (e.g., the MT/Textus Receptus) is exclusively “perfect.”
4. The Hexapla’s use of diverse sources—including those rejected by KJV Onlyists (e.g., LXX)—shows the early church valued multiple textual streams. KJV Onlyism’s reliance on the MT/Textus Receptus ignores the textual pluriformity evident in early Christianity.

Conclusion

Hexapla’s Legacy: It illustrates the early church’s recognition of textual complexity, contradicting claims of a static, “perfect” Bible. Variants were not seen as threats but as subjects for study.

VPP’s Challenge: If every word were perfectly preserved, the Hexapla’s meticulous comparisons would be unnecessary. The existence of divergent traditions (LXX vs. MT) weakens VPP’s premise.

KJV Onlyism’s Anachronism: The Hexapla predates the MT’s standardization (9th century CE) and the Textus Receptus (16th century CE). Its inclusion of pre-MT texts (e.g., LXX) invalidates KJV Onlyism’s exclusive reliance on later textual traditions.

In essence, the Hexapla supports a dynamic view of textual transmission, where preservation involves ongoing engagement with variants—a stark contrast to VPP’s static perfection or KJV Onlyism’s dogmatic exclusivity.

Origen’s bible

Origen of Alexandria (c. 185–254), one of the most influential early Christian theologians and biblical scholars, primarily used the Septuagint (LXX) for the Old Testament and the Greek New Testament manuscripts available in his time. Here’s a breakdown of the biblical texts he used:

1. Old Testament: The Septuagint (LXX)

   - Origen relied heavily on the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, which was the standard version used by Greek-speaking Jews and early Christians.

   - He recognized discrepancies between the Hebrew Masoretic text (used by rabbinic Jews) and the Greek LXX, which led him to compile the Hexapla—a massive six-column comparative Bible that included:

     1. Hebrew text  

     2. Hebrew transliterated into Greek letters  

     3. Aquila’s Greek translation (a very literal Jewish translation)  

     4. Symmachus’ Greek translation (a more literary Jewish-Greek version)  

     5. The Septuagint (LXX)  

     6. Theodotion’s Greek revision (another Jewish recension)  

   - Origen’s goal was to provide a tool for textual criticism and better exegesis.

2. New Testament: Early Greek Manuscripts

   - For the New Testament, Origen used early Greek manuscripts circulating in the 3rd century. These were uncial manuscripts (written in all capital letters) preceding later codices like Codex Sinaiticus or Codex Vaticanus.

   - He quoted extensively from the Gospels, Pauline epistles, and other NT books, showing that the canon he used was largely similar to what we have today, though debates on some books (e.g., Hebrews, Revelation, 2 Peter) were still ongoing.

3. Origen’s Influence on the Biblical Text

   - Origen’s textual work (especially the Hexapla) influenced later scholars like Jerome, who used it for his Latin Vulgate translation.

   - Some of his biblical commentaries and homilies preserve early textual variants that help modern scholars reconstruct the history of the Bible.

Conclusion

Origen primarily used the Septuagint (LXX) for the Old Testament and early Greek New Testament manuscripts. His Hexapla was a groundbreaking work in biblical textual criticism, bridging Hebrew and Greek traditions. While he didn’t use a single "Bible" as we think of it today, his scholarship shaped how later Christians understood scripture.

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) does not advocate for the exclusive use of one Bible translation

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) does not advocate for the exclusive use of one Bible translation (such as the KJV) but instead emphasizes the authority of Scripture in its original languages and the legitimacy of faithful translations. Below is the proof from the text itself, along with historical context:

________________________________________

1. Westminster Confession of Faith 1.8

"The Old Testament in Hebrew [...] and the New Testament in Greek [...] 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. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God [...] therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar [common] language of every nation unto which they come [...]"

Key Points:

• Original languages (Hebrew/Greek) are the ultimate authority.

• Translations are necessary for those who do not know Hebrew or Greek.

• No specific translation is endorsed (including the KJV). The focus is on faithful rendering into the common language.

________________________________________

2. Westminster Confession 1.10

"The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined [...] can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture."

Key Points:

• Authority resides in the content of Scripture (God’s Word), not in a specific translation.

• The KJV is not mentioned as the exclusive or "inspired" translation.

________________________________________

3. Historical Context

• The KJV (1611) predated the Westminster Assembly (1643–1653), but the Confession never names it as the sole acceptable translation.

• The Westminster Divines often quoted the Geneva Bible (a predecessor to the KJV) in their writings, demonstrating their openness to multiple translations.

• The Confession’s focus on original languages and the need for vernacular translations inherently rejects KJV-Onlyism, which arose much later (19th–20th centuries).

________________________________________

4. Proof Against KJV-Onlyism

The Confession explicitly:

1. Prioritizes Hebrew/Greek originals over any translation.

2. Mandates translations into every language, rejecting exclusivity.

3. Avoids elevating any post-apostolic tradition (including the KJV) to the level of inspired Scripture.

________________________________________

Reformed Tradition’s View

Reformed churches historically use multiple translations (e.g., ESV, NASB, NIV) as long as they accurately reflect the original texts. The KJV is respected but not dogmatically elevated.

Example:

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) and Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) officially affirm the Westminster Standards while using modern translations.

________________________________________

Conclusion

The Westminster Confession does not support KJV-Onlyism. Its insistence on the authority of the original languages and the necessity of vernacular translations aligns with the Reformed principle of sola Scriptura—not sola KJV. Any claim that the Confession endorses KJV exclusivity is a modern revisionist error.

For further study:

• The Westminster Confession of Faith: A Commentary by A.A. Hodge.

• The Making of the 1611 KJV by Gordon Campbell (historical context).

• PCA and OPC position papers on Bible translations.

John Calvin’s use of the Septuagint (LXX) in Institutes of the Christian Religion

John Calvin’s use of the Septuagint (LXX) in Institutes of the Christian Religion reflects his engagement with ancient translations, though he prioritized the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT). Below are key instances where Calvin explicitly or implicitly references the Septuagint, along with evidence of his broader reliance on it for scriptural interpretation:

---

1. Institutes 1.13.16 (Trinitarian Doctrine)

Reference: Calvin discusses the Trinity and cites Psalm 110:1 (Dominus dixit ad Dominum meum).

• LXX (Psalm 109:1): "Εἶπεν ὁ Κύριος τῷ Κυρίῳ μου" ("The Lord said to my Lord").
• MT (Psalm 110:1): "נְאֻם יְהוָה לַאדֹנִי" ("The declaration of Yahweh to my Lord").
  Analysis: Calvin uses the LXX’s Κύριος (Lord) for both divine names, aligning with the New Testament (Matthew 22:44) and early Christian Trinitarian arguments. While he acknowledges the Hebrew, the LXX framing reflects his doctrinal emphasis.

---

2. Institutes 2.6.4 (Atonement and Isaiah 53)

Reference: Calvin quotes Isaiah 53:5 to explain Christ’s substitutionary suffering.

• LXX: "τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν" ("by his bruises we were healed").
• MT: "וּבַחֲבֻרָתוֹ נִרְפָּא־לָנוּ" ("and by his wounds we are healed").
  Analysis: Calvin’s phrasing mirrors the LXX’s passive "ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν" (we were healed), aligning with his emphasis on Christ’s vicarious atonement. He likely drew from the LXX here, as it sharpens the theological focus on Christ’s role.

---

3. Institutes 1.8.1 (Authority of Scripture)

Reference: Calvin cites Psalm 119:105 ("Your word is a lamp to my feet").

• LXX (Psalm 118:105): "Λύχνος τοῖς ποσί μου ὁ νόμος σου" ("Your law is a lamp to my feet").
• MT: "נֵר־לְרַגְלִי דְבָרֶךָ" ("Your word is a lamp to my foot").
  Analysis: Calvin uses "lamp" (λύχνος) and "law" (νόμος) from the LXX, blending it with the MT’s "דבר" (word). This synthesis shows his familiarity with both texts.

---

4. Institutes 3.4.27 (Mercy Over Sacrifice)

Reference: Calvin quotes Hosea 6:6 ("I desire mercy, not sacrifice").

• LXX: "ἔλεος θέλω καὶ οὐ θυσίαν" ("mercy I desire, not sacrifice").
• MT: "כִּי חֶסֶד חָפַצְתִּי וְלֹא־זָבַח" ("for I desire steadfast love, not sacrifice").
  Analysis: Calvin’s wording aligns with the LXX’s "ἔλεος" (mercy), which Jesus also cites in Matthew 9:13. This reflects his reliance on the LXX for Christocentric interpretations.

---

5. Institutes 1.5.12 (Creation’s Testimony)

Reference: Calvin paraphrases Psalm 19:1 ("The heavens declare the glory of God").

• LXX (Psalm 18:2): "Οἱ οὐρανοὶ διηγοῦνται δόξαν Θεοῦ" ("The heavens declare the glory of God").
• MT: "הַשָּׁמַיִם מְסַפְּרִים כְּבוֹד־אֵל" ("The heavens declare the glory of God").
  Analysis: The LXX’s "διηγοῦνται" (declare) matches Calvin’s emphasis on creation’s proclamation, showing his use of the LXX for theological emphasis.

---

6. Institutes 2.10.23 (Law and Gospel)

Reference: Calvin discusses Deuteronomy 30:11–14 ("The word is near you").

• LXX: "ἐγγύς σου τὸ ῥῆμά ἐστιν" ("the word is near you").
• MT: "כִּי־קָרוֹב אֵלֶיךָ הַדָּבָר מְאֹד" ("the word is very near to you").
  Analysis: Paul quotes the LXX in Romans 10:8, and Calvin follows this tradition, using the LXX to connect Old Testament law with New Covenant grace.

---

Broader Evidence of Calvin’s Use of the Septuagint

1. Textual Criticism: Calvin frequently compares Hebrew and Greek readings in his commentaries (e.g., Genesis, Psalms), acknowledging the LXX’s value for resolving ambiguities.

2. Apocryphal Citations: Though rejecting the Apocrypha’s canonicity, Calvin quotes books like Wisdom and Sirach (e.g., Institutes 1.5.5), which were part of the LXX.

3. Christological Typology: Calvin relies on the LXX’s messianic phrasing (e.g., "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14 LXX) to defend Christ’s virgin birth, even if he prioritizes Hebrew elsewhere.

---

Conclusion

Calvin respected the Septuagint as a bridge between Hebrew Scripture and the New Testament, using it to:

• Support doctrinal arguments (e.g., Trinity, atonement).
• Align with apostolic citations (e.g., Paul’s use of LXX).
• Clarify ambiguous Hebrew passages.

While he prioritized the MT, the LXX informed his exegesis, demonstrating his commitment to a multilingual, textually informed theology. For deeper analysis, consult:

• T.H.L. Parker, Calvin’s Old Testament Commentaries.
• Richard Muller, The Unaccommodated Calvin.
• David Steinmetz, Calvin in Context.

See evil, hear evil, speak evil

In churches with both teaching elders (often pastors) and ruling elders (lay leaders), the process of electing a pastor and safeguarding leadership from false teachings and internal strife requires careful biblical, structural, and relational safeguards. Below is a concise guideline:

I. Election of the Pastor

Biblical Qualifications

1. Ensure candidates meet the standards of 1 Timothy 3:1–7 and Titus 1:5–9 (above reproach, self-controlled, able to teach, etc.).
2. Ruling elders should evaluate candidates’ doctrine, character, and alignment with the church’s confession or statement of faith.

Process

1. Search Committee: Form a team of ruling/teaching elders and congregational representatives to vet candidates.
2. Congregational Involvement: Present the candidate to the congregation for Q&A, a trial sermon, and a vote (if polity permits).
3. Ordination/Installation: Confirm the candidate through prayer, laying on of hands by existing elders (1 Timothy 4:14), and public commitment to the church’s mission.

II. Protecting Leaders from False Teachings

Doctrinal Accountability

1. Confessional Foundation: Adopt a clear statement of faith (e.g., Westminster Confession, Apostles’ Creed) and require elders to affirm it annually.
2. Regular Training: Host theological workshops and encourage ongoing education (e.g., seminaries, trusted resources).
3. Doctrinal Review: Form a committee to evaluate sermons, teachings, and materials for doctrinal soundness.

Spiritual Vigilance

1. Prayer & Scripture: Prioritize corporate prayer and regular Scripture study among leaders (Acts 6:4; Psalm 119:105).
2. Accountability Partnerships: Pair elders with mentors or peers for mutual encouragement and correction.
3. Guard Against Isolation: Invite guest speakers or consultants to provide external perspective and prevent doctrinal drift.

III. Preventing Division and Conflict

Clear Roles and Boundaries

1. Define responsibilities: Teaching elders focus on preaching/shepherding; ruling elders on governance and pastoral care.
2. Rotate leadership roles periodically to avoid power imbalances.

Conflict Resolution

1. Follow Matthew 18:15–20 for grievances, emphasizing private reconciliation before escalation.
2. Establish a mediation team (neutral elders or external advisors) for unresolved disputes.

Culture of Unity

1. Foster humility and grace through regular retreats, shared meals, and testimonies (Ephesians 4:2–3).
2. Address gossip swiftly; require elders to “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).

Transparency

1. Hold quarterly meetings for elders to share updates, challenges, and prayer requests.
2. Communicate major decisions to the congregation to avoid suspicion.

IV. Ongoing Safeguards

1. Term Limits: Implement term lengths for elders to prevent burnout and entrenched power.
2. External Oversight: Partner with a denominational body or sister churches for accountability.
3. Congregational Education: Equip members to discern truth (Hebrews 5:14) and report concerns respectfully.

By grounding leadership in Scripture, fostering accountability, and nurturing a culture of love, churches can protect their shepherds and maintain unity amid challenges.

​​Look at my name not even real how can I speak the truth?

​​Look at your name not even real how can you speak the truth?

A name doesn’t validate truth—truth validates itself.

When someone dismisses ideas based on anonymity, they conflate identity with credibility. Let me explain why that’s flawed:

Truth isn’t owned by a name.

Whether I write as “John Smith” or “Anonymous Blogger,” facts remain facts. For example, if I explain that water boils at 100°C, it doesn’t matter if I use my real name—the truth of the statement is independent of who says it, that truth holds even if I’m writing under a pseudonym.

Attacking anonymity is an ad hominem fallacy.

Questioning my name instead of engaging with my arguments shifts focus from what is said to who is saying it. Truth isn’t a resume—it’s rooted in evidence, logic, and consistency. If my claims are false, disprove them with facts. If they’re true, my identity is irrelevant.

Anonymity protects truth-tellers, not liars.

History is full of anonymous voices who spoke truth to power: think of whistleblowers, authors like “Publius” (The Federalist Papers), or even early Christians persecuted for their beliefs. Anonymity isn’t about hiding—it’s about ensuring ideas are judged on their merits, not the speaker’s reputation or vulnerabilities.

Why anonymity?

Maybe I value privacy. Maybe I want ideas, not my persona, to take center stage. Or maybe I’m avoiding backlash for challenging popular narratives. Whatever the reason, the content of my words—not my name—determines their truth.

In short, Truth is a mirror—it reflects reality, not the person holding it. If you doubt my claims, test them. But dismissing truth because of a pseudonym? That’s like rejecting a math theorem because the mathematician used a pen name. The numbers still add up.

The relationship between Scripture’s divine inspiration, translation, and the Holy Spirit’s ongoing work

1. Can God’s "God-breathed" Word Exist in Translations or Modern Languages?

The term theopneustos (“God-breathed”) in 2 Timothy 3:16 refers specifically to the original writings of Scripture (autographs) inspired by God. However, translations into other languages can faithfully convey God’s Word if they accurately reflect the original text.

Example: The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek, yet Jesus and the apostles regularly quoted the Greek Septuagint (a translation of the Hebrew OT). The Ethiopian eunuch read Isaiah in Greek (Acts 8:30-35), and the Spirit still spoke through it.

God’s Sovereignty Over Language: At Pentecost, the Spirit enabled people to hear the gospel in their own languages (Acts 2:4-11), showing God’s truth transcends linguistic barriers. Translations are valid if they faithfully transmit the original message.

God's truth transcends language. On the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), people heard the wonders of God in their own languages—a powerful affirmation that God speaks to all nations.

2. Does the Holy Spirit Work Through Modern Translations (NIV, KJV, etc.)?

John 10:35 (“Scripture cannot be broken”) emphasizes Scripture’s authority, regardless of translation. The Holy Spirit is not confined to specific translations but works through faithful renditions of the original text.

Example: The Ethiopian eunuch understood the gospel through a translated scroll (Acts 8:30-35), and the Spirit guided Philip to explain it.

Practical Reality: No translation is perfect, but reputable versions (NIV, ESV, KJV, etc.) strive to preserve the original meaning. The Spirit illuminates truth to readers through His Word, even in translation (Hebrews 4:12).

Yes. 2 Peter 1:20–21 speaks of how Scripture was originally written under the Spirit's guidance, but the Spirit continues to work in readers and hearers today. Regardless of the Bible version—whether NIV, KJV, ESV, or others—if the translation is faithful to the original meaning, the Holy Spirit can illuminate it to the reader.

Jesus said the Spirit would “guide you into all truth” (John 16:13). That guidance includes understanding God's Word, not just its original delivery.

So yes, a person reading the NIV may be just as "carried along" in understanding as someone reading the KJV, if their heart is open to God.

3. Is God’s “Living and Active” Word Limited to Greek/Hebrew?

Hebrews 4:12 affirms that Scripture’s power lies in its divine origin, not its language. Just as Jesus, the Logos (John 1:1), transcends culture and language, so does His Word.

Example: Paul preached in Greek, Latin, and local dialects (Acts 21:37-40), yet his message remained God’s truth.

Global Church Evidence: Millions encounter Christ through translations, proving the Word is “living and active” in all languages.

Absolutely. Hebrews 4:12 refers to the dynamic, penetrating power of God’s Word. This power is not confined to any one language. The Word is living because it is empowered by the Spirit who is living.

The same Spirit who inspired Scripture applies it across cultures and languages. This is why the Bible has been translated into over 3,000 languages, and in each, it remains powerful to convict, comfort, and transform lives.

Revelation 7:9 envisions people from "every nation, tribe, people and language" worshiping God—clearly implying that God's Word must reach and work in every language.

4. Does “God’s Word Stands Forever” (Isaiah 40:8) Include the New Testament?

Old Testament Context: Isaiah 40:8 refers to God’s eternal promises in the OT.

New Testament Expansion: Jesus and the apostles treated the NT as equally authoritative (2 Peter 3:16; 1 Timothy 5:18, quoting Luke 10:7 as “Scripture”).

Unified Canon: The Bible is one cohesive revelation. Paul calls all Scripture “God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16), implying the completed canon.

So, while the original verse is Old Testament, the truth it expresses—that God’s Word is eternal and unchanging—applies to the whole of Scripture, Old and New.

5. What Does “The Holy Spirit Speaking in Scripture” Mean Across Languages?

The Westminster Confession’s phrase means the Spirit’s primary voice is through Scripture itself, not extrabiblical revelations. This applies to translations when they accurately reflect the original.

In Tamil, Mandarin, etc.: Yes, the Spirit speaks through translations, as He did through the Septuagint and Latin Vulgate historically.

Key Caveat: The Spirit’s illumination depends on fidelity to the original text. A paraphrase or distorted translation may obscure His voice, but a trustworthy translation remains “God’s Word written.”

“The Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture” refers to the Spirit’s ongoing role in making the written Word understandable and authoritative for us today. According to Reformed theology (like the Westminster Confession), the Bible is not just a human book—it is the voice of the Spirit of God, and He still speaks through it.

This speaking is not limited by language. When Scripture is faithfully translated into Tamil, Mandarin, Indonesian, or any other language, the Holy Spirit can speak through it, just as powerfully as in English or Greek.

John Calvin said, “Scripture carries its own evidence,” but that the Spirit must open our hearts to receive it. That happens in every culture where God's Word is honored and read with faith.

Summary

Inspiration: Original manuscripts are uniquely “God-breathed,” but translations mediate that truth.

Authority: The Spirit works through faithful translations, not limited to original languages.

Global Reach: God’s Word is “living and active” in all languages, fulfilling the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19).

Discernment: Prioritize translations that balance accuracy (formal equivalence) and clarity (dynamic equivalence).

Thus, while no translation is inspired as the autographs were, the Holy Spirit still speaks powerfully through them to convict, teach, and transform lives worldwide.

Yes, God can breathe Scripture into other languages through faithful translation.

Yes, the Holy Spirit can illuminate the NIV or any version faithful to the original.

Yes, God's Word is active and living in every language.

Isaiah 40:8 is not limited to the Old Testament—it affirms the enduring nature of all God’s Word.

Yes, the Holy Spirit speaks through Scripture in any language where it is rightly translated and reverently read.

Letter to the Church: A Call to Holy Unity

Dear Beloved in Christ,

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I write to you with a heartfelt burden to encourage and exhort the body of Christ to pursue the unity for which our Savior prayed—a unity rooted in His truth, love, and holiness, yet distinct from the patterns of this world. Let us heed the words of Scripture and fix our eyes on the eternal unity we are called to embody.

The Call to Unity in Christ

The Lord Jesus Himself prayed for our unity, declaring, “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (John 17:21, NIV). This divine unity is not mere agreement but a reflection of the Triune God’s own nature. The Apostle Paul echoes this, urging us to “be perfectly united in mind and thought” (1 Corinthians 1:10) and to “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3). Our unity testifies to Christ’s lordship and draws others to Him.

A Warning Against Unity with the World

Yet Scripture also cautions us against compromising with worldly values. James 4:4 sternly reminds us: “Don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.” Similarly, Paul urges, “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2). To “unite with the world” is to dilute the gospel’s power and jeopardize our witness. We are called to be “in the world, but not of it” (John 17:14-16), shining as lights amid darkness (Philippians 2:15).

Heavenly Unity vs. Earthly Unity

1. Unity in Heaven: In eternity, we will experience perfect unity, free from sin and division. Revelation 7:9-10 paints a glorious picture: “a great multitude… from every nation, tribe, people, and language, standing before the throne… crying out, ‘Salvation belongs to our God!’” Heavenly unity is the fulfillment of God’s plan—a diverse yet harmonious worship of the Lamb, untainted by pride or strife.

2. Unity on Earth: Our present unity is both a foretaste and a struggle. It requires humility, forgiveness, and reliance on the Spirit. Ephesians 4:2-6 calls us to “be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love… There is one body and one Spirit… one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” Earthly unity is not uniformity but a shared pursuit of Christ’s mission, resisting worldly divisiveness (e.g., gossip, selfish ambition) while clinging to truth (Philippians 2:2-4).

A Plea and a Promise

Beloved, let us “come out from among them (the world) and be separate” (2 Corinthians 6:17), rejecting compromise with sin, yet fervently loving one another. As we do, we embody the kingdom and anticipate the day when “God will be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28).

May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you “to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 15:5-6).

In Christ’s love and hope,

An Ordained Minister