The Hypocrisy of Selective Judgment

Please read the articles “Can Christian judge? “ in https://biblewitness.com/bw-magazine/vol25-04/

 

The Hypocrisy of Selective Judgment: When “Do Not Judge” Becomes a Weapon

There is a growing trend among certain Christian circles where “Do not judge” is preached loudly — yet selectively applied. One such example is Prabudass, who publicly insists that Christians must never judge others, while simultaneously setting himself up as judge, jury, and divine authority over anyone who disagrees with his doctrinal stance or translation preferences.

Let’s call this behavior what it is: spiritual hypocrisy.

1. The Double Standard of “Do Not Judge”

When Jesus said, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” (Matthew 7:1), He was not forbidding all forms of discernment. He was condemning hypocritical judgment — the kind where someone condemns others for the very sins or errors they themselves commit.
Yet this is exactly what happens when a person claims that others have “no right to judge,” then turns around and declares that everyone who reads a particular Bible translation (like the NIV) is “unfaithful,” “compromising,” or “corrupted.”

If one truly believes that Christians cannot judge, then that standard must apply equally to oneself.
But if one feels free to condemn others’ faith, their translation, or their convictions — then one has already made a judgment. The only question is whether that judgment is righteous or hypocritical.

2. The Irony of Claiming “Only My Bible Is Perfect”

The claim that the King James Version (KJV) and the Textus Receptus (TR) are the only “perfectly preserved” and “authentic” Scriptures is not just a theological position — it’s often wielded as a weapon of exclusion.
When someone declares that only their translation or text form is the true Word of God, they are not defending faith; they are playing God.
They are placing themselves in a position of ultimate authority, determining who is “faithful” and who is “corrupt,” who is “pure” and who is “compromised.”

This is the very sin of the Pharisees — elevating human traditions, interpretations, and textual preferences to the level of divine revelation.

To say “the NIV is corrupted” is itself a judgment. To call those who read it “unfaithful” is a condemnation. So when someone says Christians cannot judge — yet they themselves sit in judgment over translations, readers, and institutions — they are living a theological contradiction.

3. Biblical Discernment Is Not Hypocritical Judgment

Scripture commands believers to discern truth from error (1 John 4:1, Acts 17:11). But discernment is different from hypocrisy.

• Discernment examines ideas and doctrines in light of Scripture, humbly and truthfully.
• Hypocrisy condemns others to elevate oneself, often under the guise of “defending the faith.”

If someone truly holds the Word of God as sacred, their life should reflect its humility, not its weaponization.
Christ did not say, “By your translation you will be known,” but “By your love.”

4. Acting Like God: The Core of the Problem

When someone claims to “hold the authenticated perfect Bible” and treats all other believers as spiritually inferior, they are not honoring God’s Word — they are enthroning themselves.
The claim of Verbal Plenary Preservation as exclusive to the KJV is not an act of faith; it’s an act of pride when used to discredit others.

If God’s Word is living and active (Hebrews 4:12), then His truth transcends one translation, one manuscript tradition, and certainly one man’s opinion.

5. The Call to True Humility and Integrity

The problem isn’t defending the KJV — it’s the spirit in which it’s defended.
If one’s “faith” depends on belittling others, that faith is no longer in Christ but in control.
If one’s “doctrine of preservation” leads to division and arrogance, it has ceased to be a doctrine of grace and has become a doctrine of superiority.

True Christians can — and must — judge rightly (John 7:24). But judgment begins with oneself. It requires the humility to admit, “I could be wrong.”

Prabudass’s contradictions expose a deeper issue: the need for authority and certainty at the expense of humility and grace.
But no one — not even the most zealous defender of the KJV — gets to play God.

Conclusion: Truth Without Arrogance

Christians are called to stand for truth, but not to trample others in the process.
When someone says, “You cannot judge,” yet spends their ministry judging everyone else, they are not defending holiness — they are revealing hypocrisy.

Faithfulness to God’s Word is not proven by the translation one reads, but by the transformation one lives.
And that transformation always begins with humility, not hubris.

You don’t need to preach a perfect gospel

No one needs to preach a “perfect” gospel to evangelize faithfully. In fact, the very idea of perfection in evangelism can become a form of pride or paralysis that stops people from actually sharing Christ.

1. The Gospel Itself Is Perfect — We Aren’t

The message of the gospel — Christ crucified and risen for the salvation of sinners — is already perfect. It doesn’t depend on our eloquence, theological precision, or flawless memory.

“We have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us.” — 2 Corinthians 4:7

You’re not the treasure. You’re the jar. God intentionally uses fragile, imperfect people so that His glory—not our performance—is what shines.

2. Faithfulness > Flawlessness

What matters is faithfulness to the essence of the gospel — that Jesus is Lord, that He died and rose to reconcile us to God, and that salvation is through Him alone by grace through faith.
You don’t need to unpack every nuance of justification or atonement theories on the spot. The early church spread across the Roman Empire because ordinary believers spoke of Jesus with conviction and love, not because they all had seminary degrees.

3. The Spirit Perfects What We Can’t

Evangelism isn’t a solo act. The Holy Spirit convicts hearts and clarifies truth far better than we ever could.
Even when we fumble words or forget verses, the Spirit uses our obedience as raw material for His work. What you say imperfectly today, He can reveal perfectly in someone’s heart later.

4. Real People Connect with Real People

People don’t need a flawless theological dissertation — they need to see that the gospel actually matters to you. Authenticity often communicates Christ more effectively than precision.
Tell the truth. Speak with love. Admit what you don’t know. That kind of honesty carries spiritual weight.

5. Keep Growing, But Don’t Wait

Yes, grow in understanding — refine your grasp of Scripture, learn to explain the gospel clearly. But don’t wait until you feel “ready” or “perfect.” The best way to learn to share the gospel… is to share it. God refines both your message and your heart in the field, not in theory.

Bottom line:
You don’t need to preach a perfect gospel — just a true one.
You don’t need to be perfect — just surrendered.
You don’t need to know everything — just the One who does.

Without Grumbling or Arguing

Without Grumbling or Arguing: Divine Cooperation and the Integrity of Scripture

Introduction

In Philippians 2:12–18, the Apostle Paul exhorts believers to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.” This passage captures one of the most profound paradoxes in Christian theology: the dynamic interplay between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Within it lies a broader pastoral appeal—to live as children of light, united and blameless, avoiding the destructive habits of grumbling and disputing.

This exhortation bears special relevance to the modern church, where disputes over the “perfect” form of Scripture often overshadow the unity and joy that should define Christian life. Paul’s teaching invites a posture of reverence, humility, and rejoicing in God’s ongoing work—both in believers and in the preservation of His Word across history.

1. Working Out What God Works In

The command to “work out your salvation” does not imply human self-sufficiency in securing redemption. The Greek term "katergazesthe" conveys the idea of bringing something to completion, much like a craftsman refining what has already been formed. Salvation is a divine gift received by faith, yet its fruits must be actively cultivated in the believer’s life.

“Fear and trembling” denote not dread but reverential awe—a deep consciousness of God’s holiness and nearness. The Christian does not tremble in terror before a capricious deity but stands in solemn wonder before the God who indwells and transforms. This reverence guards believers against complacency, reminding them that sanctification is a sacred partnership, not a passive inheritance.

2. Divine Synergy: God’s Work Within the Believer

Paul immediately grounds this exhortation in divine action: “for it is God who works in you.” The verb "energeō" (from which we derive “energy”) signifies continuous, effectual operation. The believer’s effort is meaningful precisely because God’s power animates it. This is not a division of labor but a cooperation of grace. Human obedience becomes the visible expression of God’s invisible activity.

This principle of synergy—divine initiative and human response—extends beyond individual sanctification to the corporate life of the church. Communities that live under this awareness display humility, patience, and unity, recognizing that their collective vitality depends upon God’s sustaining work rather than human perfectionism.

3. “Do Everything Without Grumbling or Arguing”

Paul’s pastoral concern swiftly turns practical: “Do everything without grumbling or arguing.” The language recalls the murmuring of Israel in the wilderness, where discontent undermined faith and fellowship. Grumbling reflects distrust in divine providence, while arguing breeds division within the body of Christ.

Applied to contemporary contexts, this admonition challenges the church’s tendency to quarrel over the textual perfection of Scripture. While textual criticism and manuscript study are valuable disciplines, they must not become grounds for spiritual arrogance or discord. The integrity of God’s revelation does not depend upon an unblemished manuscript but upon the faithful transmission of divine truth through human history.

4. The Preservation of Scripture: A Testimony of Providence

The preservation of the biblical text across languages and centuries—Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Byzantine, and Alexandrian traditions—reveals a pattern of divine providence rather than human control. No single textual family holds exclusive claim to divine authority. Instead, the multiplicity of manuscripts demonstrates God’s wisdom in dispersing His Word through many cultures, ensuring both preservation and accessibility.

Just as the incarnation brought divine truth into the limitations of human flesh, so the transmission of Scripture brought divine revelation into the textures of human language. The Word of God is living and active, not confined to ink and parchment. Its perfection lies in its message, not its medium.

5. Paul’s Example: Joy Amid Imperfection

Paul concludes his exhortation with a striking declaration: “I am glad and rejoice with all of you. So you too should be glad and rejoice with me.” His joy is not rooted in external perfection but in the shared experience of faith and obedience. He rejoices not over flawless texts or doctrinal precision but over the faithful lives of believers who “shine like stars in the sky.”

This attitude reflects the heart of Christian maturity: confidence in God’s ongoing work rather than anxiety over human error. To insist upon a “perfect Bible” in a purely textual sense is to misunderstand the nature of revelation. God has preserved His truth infallibly in substance, though conveyed through fallible human instruments.

6. Rejoicing in the Word Rather Than Arguing Over It

The church is thus called to rejoice in the miraculous continuity of Scripture rather than to quarrel over its mechanics. The variations among textual traditions do not undermine the gospel; they illuminate the richness of its history. The divine message has survived empires, translations, and controversies because God’s Spirit ensures that the essential truth remains intact.

To grumble for perfection is to distrust God’s providence. To rejoice in preservation is to affirm His sovereignty. The church’s mission is not to defend a single manuscript but to embody the living Word through obedience, unity, and joy.

Conclusion

Philippians 2:12–18 reveals that salvation and Scripture alike are arenas of divine-human cooperation. Believers are called to live out their salvation with reverent diligence, knowing that God is the one who energizes both will and action. Likewise, they are to honor God’s providential work in preserving His Word without descending into grumbling or contention.

Paul’s counsel remains timeless: rejoice in the God who works within us, trust the Spirit who has preserved His truth across generations, and live as lights in a world darkened by cynicism and pride. The perfection of God’s Word is not found in the uniformity of manuscripts but in the unbroken continuity of its message—the living Christ who still speaks through every faithful translation and heart transformed by grace.

Guarding the Faith

Guarding the Faith: An Exegetical and Theological Examination of Colossians 2:8 in Relation to Verbal Plenary Preservation

Abstract

This essay examines the apostle Paul’s warning in Colossians 2:8 (NIV)—“See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ”—as a theological safeguard against teachings that displace Christ as the center of faith. Specifically, the study applies Paul’s exhortation to the modern claim of Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP), evaluating the doctrine’s philosophical structure and implications for biblical authority. The essay argues that VPP, while emerging from a desire to defend Scripture’s purity, risks repeating the very error Paul warns against: grounding assurance in human tradition and textual absolutism rather than in the sufficiency of Christ.

1. Introduction

Throughout Christian history, the preservation of Scripture has been both a theological conviction and an apologetic necessity. The early church affirmed that “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16) and that divine revelation is preserved by the Spirit for the edification of believers. However, Paul’s letter to the Colossians presents an enduring tension: while affirming truth, believers must remain vigilant against systems of thought that distort or enslave.

In Colossians 2:8, Paul issues a comprehensive warning against ideologies that masquerade as wisdom but divert believers from the sufficiency of Christ. His language reflects both the intellectual climate of Hellenistic Colossae and the perennial temptation of the church to substitute divine revelation with human construction. This essay argues that the doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation represents such a substitution when it elevates human textual theory to the level of divine authority.

2. Exegetical Analysis of Colossians 2:8

2.1 “See to it” — The Imperative of Vigilance

The Greek phrase blepete mē tis humas estai ho sylagōgōn (“see to it that no one takes you captive”) introduces the verse with a strong imperative. Paul’s command calls for active discernment rather than passive belief. In Pauline ethics, faith is inseparable from intellectual vigilance; believers must continuously guard their minds from deception (cf. 2 Cor. 10:5).

2.2 “Takes you captive” — The Image of Spiritual Abduction

The verb sylagōgeō conveys the image of being carried off as plunder. This metaphor suggests that false teaching is not merely erroneous—it is enslaving. Doctrinal deviation leads to spiritual captivity, echoing Paul’s broader concern that false philosophy can “enslave” believers to “the weak and miserable forces” of the world (Gal. 4:9).

2.3 “Through hollow and deceptive philosophy” — Empty Reasoning

The phrase dia tēs philosophias kai kenēs apatēs (“through philosophy and empty deceit”) juxtaposes human intellectualism with divine wisdom. While the term philosophia is not inherently negative—it literally means “love of wisdom”—Paul critiques a kind of pseudo-wisdom devoid of revelation. Such “empty deceit” refers to intellectual systems that possess form without substance.

2.4 “Which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world”

Here, Paul identifies two sources of deceptive systems: (1) anthrōpōn paradosin (“human tradition”), referring to doctrines derived from human lineage rather than divine authority, and (2) ta stoicheia tou kosmou (“elemental spiritual forces”), which may denote either worldly principles or demonic influences (cf. Gal. 4:3). Together they represent the intellectual and spiritual foundations of false teaching.

2.5 “Rather than on Christ” — The Criterion of Authentic Doctrine

The prepositional phrase kata Christon (“according to Christ”) provides the verse’s theological center. All thought must be measured by its conformity to Christ—His person, work, and revelation. For Paul, any teaching that draws faith away from the centrality of Christ, no matter how pious or traditional, is inherently deceptive (Bruce, 1984).

3. The Doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation

3.1 Definition and Historical Development

The doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation asserts that God not only inspired the Scriptures in their original autographs (verbal plenary inspiration) but also preserved every word perfectly throughout history in a specific textual stream—most often identified with the Textus Receptus or the King James Version. This theory arose primarily in the twentieth century as a reaction to modern textual criticism and as an extension of the doctrine of inerrancy (Letis, 1997).

While traditional Christianity has always affirmed that God preserves His Word (cf. Ps. 119:89), VPP takes this affirmation to a rigid literalism, asserting that a particular manuscript tradition represents an unbroken chain of divine preservation. This view, however, conflates divine providence with human transmission and equates preservation with replication, a distinction foreign to the biblical text itself.

4. Theological Evaluation in Light of Colossians 2:8

4.1 Dependence on Human Tradition

Paul warns against systems “dependent on human tradition.” VPP exemplifies this dependence by resting its claims on historical and linguistic arguments rather than explicit biblical teaching. The belief that one manuscript family (Byzantine) was uniquely preserved by God lacks scriptural warrant and relies heavily on post-apostolic historical conjecture (Carson, 1979). Thus, it constitutes a tradition of men rather than revelation from God.

4.2 Hollow and Deceptive Philosophy

VPP presents itself as a defense of orthodoxy, yet it introduces an intellectual structure that risks eclipsing Christ’s sufficiency. The doctrine’s insistence on textual perfection functions philosophically—it creates an illusion of certainty grounded not in faith but in human reasoning about manuscripts. This “hollow” confidence mirrors the Colossian heresy’s tendency to substitute human speculation for divine revelation.

4.3 The Elemental Spiritual Forces

Paul’s reference to “elemental forces” captures the deeper spiritual dynamic at play. When believers anchor their assurance in the perfection of a text rather than the perfection of Christ, they return to the world’s logic of control and mastery. The desire for absolute textual certainty reflects humanity’s ancient temptation: to secure truth apart from faith.

4.4 “Rather than on Christ”

Ultimately, VPP diverts the believer’s focus from the living Word to the written word. While Scripture is authoritative, its authority derives from the person of Christ (cf. John 5:39–40). To make textual preservation the measure of divine reliability is to invert the relationship between Christ and Scripture. True faith rests on the incarnate Word, not on any single textual tradition.

5. Faithfulness to the Calling

The church’s vocation is not to enshrine a particular translation but to proclaim the Christ whom Scripture reveals. The history of the canon itself demonstrates divine preservation through diversity rather than uniformity: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts were transmitted across cultures and centuries under God’s providence. The Spirit has preserved truth, not by freezing it in one human form, but by ensuring that the gospel remains accessible and transformative across time and language.

Faithfulness, therefore, entails discernment rooted in humility. The Christian scholar and pastor must resist both the skepticism that denies preservation and the dogmatism that idolizes a single tradition. The sufficiency of Christ—not textual absolutism—secures the reliability of Scripture.

6. Conclusion

Paul’s warning to the Colossians remains profoundly relevant. The church must guard itself against every form of “hollow and deceptive philosophy”—whether ancient Gnosticism or modern textual dogmatism—that shifts the center of faith away from Christ.

Verbal Plenary Preservation, though motivated by reverence for Scripture, inadvertently risks the very captivity Paul condemns. By grounding assurance in a humanly preserved text rather than in the living Christ, it turns a doctrine of faith into a system of fear.

The enduring task of the church is to “see to it” that Christ remains the measure of all truth. The written Word leads us to the Living Word; He alone is infallible, immutable, and eternally preserved.

References

Bruce, F. F. The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.

Carson, D. A. The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.

Letis, T. The Ecclesiastical Text: Text Criticism, Biblical Authority, and the Popular Mind. Philadelphia: Institute for Renaissance and Reformation Biblical Studies, 1997.

Remember

The Greatness and Truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:12–22)

12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.

19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

In Ephesians 2:12–22, Paul presents the Gospel not as a mere religious idea but as a divine act that reshapes reality itself. He writes to a mixed audience — Gentiles and Jews — who once stood on opposite sides of a deep historical and spiritual divide. The Gentiles, he says, were once “without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.” This is not simply a description of lostness; it is a portrait of spiritual exile. Humanity stood outside the covenant family, separated from God and from one another. The greatness of the Gospel begins precisely here — in God’s willingness to enter into this hopeless distance and close it through Christ.

Paul’s next phrase explodes with divine reversal: “But now in Christ Jesus, you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.” The truth of the Gospel rests on this cosmic movement — not humanity ascending to God through effort or law, but God descending to humanity in mercy. The blood of Christ, symbolizing His sacrificial death, is not just an act of forgiveness but an act of unification. It is through that self-giving love that the dividing wall between peoples, between heaven and earth, collapses.

Paul continues: “For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of partition.” This “wall” was both literal — like the barrier in the Jerusalem Temple that separated Gentiles from Jews — and metaphorical, representing sin, pride, and estrangement. Christ does not negotiate peace; He is peace. He abolishes the system of hostility that kept humanity fractured. In doing so, He forms what Paul calls “one new man,” a new humanity no longer defined by tribal, ethnic, or ritual boundaries but by shared life in Christ. This is not mere reconciliation; it is recreation.

The Gospel’s greatness lies in this creative power. Where human effort produces division, the grace of God produces unity. The Gospel does not merely patch up broken relationships — it births an entirely new kind of community, one that mirrors God’s own character. Through Christ, we are “no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and members of the household of God.” The Church, in this sense, is not a social club or a moral association; it is the visible reality of a restored cosmos. In it, heaven’s architecture becomes visible on earth.

Paul ends with architectural imagery: believers are “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.” The cornerstone determines the structure’s alignment and stability. Likewise, Christ determines the shape and direction of the new humanity. Every believer is a “living stone,” joined together into a dwelling place for God’s Spirit. The Gospel, then, is not only about saving individuals from sin but about constructing a temple — a living, breathing sanctuary — where God dwells among His people.

In summary

The greatness and truth of the Gospel in Ephesians 2:12–22 lie in its total scope: it redeems, reconciles, and rebuilds. It addresses the human condition of alienation and answers it with divine nearness. It shatters hostility and creates peace. It transforms strangers into family and rebuilds humanity into God’s temple. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is not an abstract doctrine; it is the unveiling of a new creation, where God and humanity dwell together again.

That is the essence of Christian hope — not escape from the world, but its renewal through the life of Christ.

Boasting in the Cross

Boasting in the Cross: A Warning Against Elevating Traditions Above Christ

In Galatians 6:14, the Apostle Paul writes, "But as for me, I will never boast about anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ." These words are not just a personal declaration; they are a guiding principle for all believers. Paul’s message is clear: our boasting, our confidence, our pride should never lie in our traditions, our knowledge, or our theological stances—but only in the cross of Jesus Christ.

In our day, there is a growing tendency to elevate certain theological positions, traditions, and practices as if they are the foundation of our faith. Some boast in a particular Bible translation, such as the King James Version (KJV). Others place their confidence in doctrines like Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) or in the pursuit of a “perfect” Textus Receptus (TR). While these positions may have their merits in certain contexts, boasting in them, as if they were the cornerstone of our faith, is not only misguided but also dangerous to the unity and witness of the Church.

The Folly of Boasting in Tradition

The Bible teaches us that boasting in anything other than the cross of Christ is futile. Whether it is a translation, a manuscript tradition, or any theological position that we hold, it should never be the source of our pride. The danger of boasting in these things lies in the fact that it diverts our focus from Christ to human endeavors. It elevates tradition above truth, human interpretations above divine revelation, and, ultimately, leads to division and disunity within the Church.

When we boast about a translation or a particular manuscript tradition, we are, in essence, saying that this is the ultimate standard of truth. This could lead others to believe that the gospel message, which is meant to unite all believers, is bound by a particular set of linguistic or historical traditions. But the gospel of Jesus Christ is not bound to any one translation or interpretation; it is bound to the truth of the cross.

Paul warns us about this tendency in 1 Corinthians 1:10-13, where he addresses the divisions in the Corinthian church: “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.” The church was dividing over issues that should not have been dividing them at all—issues like which leader they followed or which tradition they held. Paul’s response is firm: "Is Christ divided?" (1 Corinthians 1:13). The same applies to our modern divisions over translations and doctrines like VPP or TR. Christ is not divided, and neither should we be.

The Danger of Dividing the Church

When we make our traditions or theological positions the source of our boasting, we run the risk of creating factions within the body of Christ. The gospel is not meant to be a point of division but a source of unity. The message of salvation through Christ’s death and resurrection is what brings believers together, not our preferences for a particular Bible version or our understanding of textual preservation.

Consider the example of the early Church. The apostles did not boast about the manuscripts they had or the traditions they followed; they boasted in Christ and His work on the cross. In Acts 4:12, Peter boldly declares, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." This is the heart of the gospel—the salvation found in Jesus Christ alone. The apostle Paul, too, warned the Corinthians against boasting in human wisdom or tradition. In 1 Corinthians 2:2, he wrote, “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” Paul understood that the message of the cross is the central and defining truth of the Christian faith.

The Greatness of the Cross

Why is it wrong to boast in anything but the cross? The cross of Jesus Christ is the only thing that can truly save, transform, and unite us. It is through the cross that humanity finds forgiveness for sins, reconciliation with God, and the hope of eternal life. It is through the cross that we are made one with Christ and one with each other.

At the cross, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, took upon Himself the sins of the world—past, present, and future. The Bible teaches that “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). Jesus, who was sinless, bore the full weight of our guilt and shame. He was mocked, beaten, and crucified, not because of any wrong He had done, but because He chose to take our place.

On the cross, Jesus paid the ultimate price for our redemption, satisfying the justice of God and demonstrating His boundless love for humanity. The cross is where God's holiness and His love meet. It is where we find forgiveness and freedom. It is through the cross that we are reconciled to God and one another, becoming part of a new community—the Church. The cross is the center of our faith, and it should be the source of our boasting, our pride, and our confidence.

To boast in anything else—whether it is our traditions, our theological positions, or even our understanding of biblical preservation—distracts from the greatness of the cross. The message of the cross is clear: “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” This is the heart of the gospel, and it is the only message that has the power to save.

Introducing Jesus Christ to False Teachers

To those who place their confidence in something other than Christ—whether it be a particular Bible translation, a certain theological system, or a doctrinal position like Verbal Plenary Preservation or the Perfect Textus Receptus—I offer this loving and solemn reminder: Jesus Christ is the foundation of our faith, not human systems of thought or tradition. The cross is the point of salvation, not the paper or ink we use to communicate God’s Word.

Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, came to this earth to rescue us from the consequences of sin. He lived a perfect life, died a sacrificial death, and rose again, offering to all who believe in Him the free gift of eternal life. Jesus is the one who forgives sins, transforms hearts, and unites believers. He is the one we should boast in, for He alone is worthy of our praise and our trust.

I urge you, my brothers and sisters, to refocus your attention on the cross of Christ. Do not boast in traditions or positions that ultimately cannot save or transform. Boast in the one who was crucified for you and for me. The power of the gospel is not in our ability to defend a particular text or tradition, but in the finished work of Christ on the cross.

Conclusion

The message of the gospel is simple yet profound: Christ crucified for our sins. This is the message we must proclaim, and this is the only thing we should boast about. Traditions, positions, and theologies are secondary to the truth of the cross. If we elevate anything else above Christ, we are in danger of missing the heart of the gospel and creating divisions that harm the unity of the Church.

Let us, as a Church, boast only in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us unite around Him, the one who was crucified and resurrected for our sake. In Him alone, we find salvation, unity, and eternal life. The cross is our glory, our confidence, and our hope. May it always be the foundation upon which we stand.

A Message of Warning

A Message of Warning Regarding Verbal Plenary Preservation and the Pursuit of a Perfect Textus Receptus

I hope this message finds you well. I write with a sincere heart, burdened by the direction some teachings are taking in regard to the doctrine of Bible preservation, particularly concerning Verbal Plenary Preservation and the pursuit of a perfect Textus Receptus (TR). While I understand the deep desire for truth, clarity, and fidelity to Scripture, I believe it is important to remind you of the scriptural warnings concerning division and discord within the Body of Christ.

In Galatians 5:15-21, Paul warns us about the dangers of quarrels, strife, and division: “But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another” (Galatians 5:15). 

"But if you bite and devour one another, watch out, or you will be consumed by one another." (CBS)

Paul goes on to explain that those who engage in such contentious behaviors, who promote division and factions within the Church, are walking in the flesh and not in the Spirit. These behaviors, he says, lead to destruction. “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revelings, and such like…” (Galatians 5:19-21).

I raise this passage because I fear that the emphasis on the perfect preservation of a single manuscript family, such as the Textus Receptus, can inadvertently fuel divisions within the Church—divisions that the New Testament so strongly warns against. When we elevate one translation or manuscript tradition above all others, asserting its perfection and exclusive authority, we risk causing unnecessary conflict and division. In doing so, we may find ourselves biting and devouring one another over an issue that, while important, should not divide the body of Christ.

The pursuit of "perfect preservation"—whether through the Textus Receptus or any other text—can become an idol if it leads to factionalism. While I wholeheartedly affirm the importance of safeguarding the truth and the integrity of Scripture, we must remember that the central message of the Bible is the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the unity of the Church in Him is paramount. Paul’s message in 1 Corinthians 1:10 is clear: “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.”

When we divide the body of Christ over debates regarding the perfection of a specific text or translation, we risk falling into the very patterns of division Paul warned against. The Bible itself calls us to prioritize love, unity, and peace within the Body. Jesus prayed for the unity of believers, “That they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me” (John 17:21). Our mission is to be one in Christ, not divided over secondary issues.

The stakes are higher than just doctrinal purity—they involve the witness of the Church to the world. When Christians bicker over textual minutiae, especially over issues of translation or preservation, we run the risk of damaging our collective testimony and hindering the gospel message.

Additionally, the idea of a "perfect" manuscript or translation often ignores the reality of how God’s Word has been preserved through history. The Bible was not originally given in English, and God’s Spirit has worked through countless translations, versions, and manuscripts to bring His Word to believers across cultures and times. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the power of God’s Word is not in a particular manuscript tradition, but in the Holy Spirit’s work in the hearts of believers. The Scriptures are living and active, and the message of salvation remains unchanged even through translation.

Finally, I must warn against the spiritual dangers of pushing divisive doctrines that elevate human tradition over the unity of the Church. Those who persist in factionalism and division over the nature of biblical preservation may, in effect, be sowing seeds of destruction rather than seeds of peace. As Paul wrote in Galatians 5:21, “I have told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” The divisive spirit that promotes strife and division—whether over the Textus Receptus, the King James Version, or any other issue—poses a real danger to one’s spiritual health and testimony.

Let us remember that our mission is to preach the gospel, not to engage in endless debates over textual minutiae. God has preserved His Word, and He has done so in a way that makes it accessible to all nations and peoples. Our task is to faithfully proclaim that Word, to live by it, and to share it with others—not to divide the Body of Christ over issues that should not separate us.

I urge you to consider the weight of these warnings and to reflect on the broader purpose of our work as teachers and servants of the Word. Let us seek peace, unity, and mutual understanding in all things, and remember that the gospel message is far greater than any one translation or manuscript tradition.

With love and concern for the Body of Christ,

Russell Joel 

The Message, Not Just the Words

The Message, Not Just the Words: Understanding Paul's Purpose in Writing Scripture

In 2 Corinthians 1:13, Paul writes, 

“For we write none other things unto you, than what ye read or acknowledge; and I trust ye shall acknowledge even to the end. As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are our's in the day of the Lord Jesus.”  (KJV)

For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand. And I hope that, as you have understood us in part, you will come to understand fully that you can boast of us just as we will boast of you in the day of the Lord Jesus. (NIV)

For we are writing nothing to you other than what you can read and also understand. I hope you will understand completely—just as you have partially understood us—that we are your reason for pride, just as you also are ours in the day of our Lord Jesus. (CSB)

The underlying purpose of Paul’s writings here is to convey a message, a spiritual truth, that is meant to be understood by all believers. This emphasizes the role of the message, not necessarily the exact preservation of every word, as the ultimate goal of Scripture. In examining this verse, we can explore a larger point about the nature of Scripture and how it should be understood, especially in relation to the idea of "KJV-Onlyism"—the belief that only the King James Version of the Bible is the true and proper translation for English-speaking Christians.

The Primacy of the Message in Scripture

Paul's epistles, and indeed the entire Bible, were written to communicate the truths of God—His love, salvation, commandments, and promises. The central focus of the Scripture is not the preservation of specific words in a specific language, but the transmission of a divine message. Paul was not writing to preserve a sacred linguistic tradition, but to share a living truth that would lead people to faith, transformation, and salvation. This is evident in Paul’s own words: “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2). Paul’s purpose was to communicate the message of Christ and His redemptive work, not to focus on a particular form of language.

In the same way, when Paul writes to the Corinthians, he stresses that the message is accessible and understandable. The goal is for the readers to recognize and acknowledge the truth of God’s Word. Paul’s writing is meant to be read and understood—meaning, the clarity and comprehension of the message is of utmost importance, rather than the exact form of the words used.

The Role of Translation in the Preservation of the Message

When considering the message of Scripture, it’s important to recognize that the Bible has been translated into many languages, and this has been essential for the spread of the gospel worldwide. The Word of God is not bound to one language, nor was it ever intended to be. God’s message transcends the confines of human speech and cultural boundaries. In fact, the Holy Spirit has inspired many translations over the centuries, each one seeking to convey the truth of Scripture in a way that can be understood by people in their own languages.

The King James Version (KJV), though a historically significant translation, is not the only valid or inspired translation. The KJV is often considered a beautiful and poetic translation, but it is also based on the language and idioms of 17th-century England. Language changes over time, and many modern translations aim to present Scripture in a way that is clearer and more accessible to contemporary readers. This is why translations like the New International Version (NIV), the English Standard Version (ESV), and others are widely used—they communicate the same timeless message of the gospel in a way that modern readers can grasp.

It is important to understand that God’s Word is living and active (Hebrews 4:12), and the message of salvation remains unchanged, no matter the translation. The divine truth of Scripture does not depend on a specific translation but on the power of the Holy Spirit to communicate that truth through whatever language or version is used. This is especially important when we consider global Christianity—there are millions of people who have access to God’s Word only through translations other than the KJV.

Refuting the KJV-Only Teaching

The belief in the KJV-Only doctrine, which asserts that only the King James Version is the true Bible, stands in stark contrast to the broader biblical understanding of how Scripture functions. KJV-Only advocates often claim that the KJV is the most faithful and perfect translation of the Bible, sometimes going so far as to suggest that all modern translations are corrupt or inaccurate. However, this viewpoint overlooks several important facts.

1. The Bible Was Not Originally Written in English: The Old Testament was written primarily in Hebrew and Aramaic, and the New Testament in Greek. The KJV is a translation from these original languages, and while it is a respected translation, it is not the original text. The message of Scripture is preserved in the original languages and in various translations, as the truth of the Bible transcends language.

2. Language Evolution: The English language has evolved significantly since the 17th century. Many words in the KJV now have meanings that differ from their original usage, which can create confusion for modern readers. The KJV itself is not a "perfect" translation—it was the product of a specific time, place, and group of translators, just like every translation that came before or after it.

3. The Importance of Clarity: The Bible's primary purpose is to communicate God's truth. If a translation makes that truth clearer and more accessible to a wider audience, then it is fulfilling its purpose. This does not diminish the sanctity or authority of earlier translations, but rather, it acknowledges the importance of making God's Word understandable to people in every generation and every language.

4. Preservation of the Message, Not the Form: The central issue with KJV-Onlyism is its emphasis on the preservation of a particular form of words rather than the preservation of the message. The Bible is not about the preservation of a particular linguistic tradition but about conveying a message of salvation, grace, and truth that applies to all people, in every language, in every age. The Bible’s power lies in its message, not in the preservation of specific words or phrases.

Conclusion

Paul’s writings in 2 Corinthians 1:13 point to the central purpose of Scripture: to communicate a message that can be understood by all people. The Word of God is not bound to one particular language or translation. The truth of Scripture remains the same, regardless of the translation, because it is the Holy Spirit who empowers the Word to reach the hearts and minds of readers. As such, the focus of our study should be on the message of the Bible—the gospel of Jesus Christ—rather than on defending one particular translation as the exclusive, authoritative version.

The KJV-Only doctrine, while well-meaning in its desire to protect the integrity of Scripture, ultimately misplaces the focus. It is the message that matters most, not the form in which it is presented. Every translation that faithfully conveys the truth of God’s Word has value, and God’s Word continues to speak powerfully to believers through every version.

Words Only?

1. 1 Thessalonians 1:5

Paul’s words in 1 Thessalonians 1:5 (NIV) say:

“Because our gospel came to you not simply with words but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and deep conviction.”

Paul’s emphasis is that the true authority of the Gospel is not found in the mere words themselves, but in the power of the Holy Spirit that accompanies those words — the transforming presence of God that brings life, conviction, and faith.

2. Paul’s Point: God’s Power, Not Just Human Words

Paul is reminding believers that Christianity is not just a system of doctrines or texts, but a living encounter with God.

• Words are the vehicle, not the source, of divine power.

• The Holy Spirit gives life and authority to the message.

• A perfect set of words, without God’s empowering presence, is empty (compare 2 Corinthians 3:6: “The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”).

3. Applying This to Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP)

VPP teaches that every word of Scripture, in the original languages, has been perfectly preserved by God. This belief grows out of the doctrine of Verbal Plenary Inspiration (that every word of Scripture was inspired by God).

However, when this idea becomes a fixation on the exact text or manuscript tradition (e.g., the Textus Receptus as the only preserved text), Paul’s words offer a helpful corrective:

The Gospel’s authority doesn’t rest merely on the perfection of preserved words, but on the divine power that animates them.

Paul would likely say that God’s Word is living and active (Heb. 4:12), not because it has been preserved letter-perfect in a certain manuscript line, but because God Himself is still speaking through it today.

4. Applying This to KJV-Onlyism

The KJV-Only movement goes further, asserting that the 1611 King James Version (or one of its later editions) is the only perfectly preserved English Bible — sometimes even suggesting that God re-inspired the translators.

From Paul’s perspective, this risks substituting reverence for a translation in place of reliance on God’s power.

• Paul’s focus is on the Spirit’s work in people’s hearts, not the perfection of a human rendering.

• The KJV is a beautiful and historic translation — but no translation, however accurate, is the measure of divine power.

• The Spirit, not the version, makes the Word alive.

So if someone says, “Only the KJV carries God’s power,” Paul might respond, “No — the power comes not simply with words, but with the Spirit.”

5. A Balanced View

Paul would affirm the importance of Scripture’s accuracy and faithfulness, but he would remind us that:

• Preservation serves proclamation — not the other way around.

• The Spirit’s empowerment is what makes Scripture effective.

• Faithfulness to God means depending on His presence, not idolizing a particular text form.

In Summary

If Paul were addressing modern debates, he might say something like:

“The Gospel did not come to you through perfect manuscripts or flawless translation, but through the living power of God working in your hearts.”

 

Islamic Influence on the Christian Doctrines of Verbal Plenary Preservation and the Perfect Textus Receptus

Thesis:

Islamic Influence on the Christian Doctrines of Verbal Plenary Preservation and the Perfect Textus Receptus

Introduction

The doctrines of Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) and belief in a Perfect Textus Receptus (TR) represent specific strands of conservative Protestant thought which assert that God not only inspired the words of Scripture but has preserved them perfectly throughout history. Although these doctrines are rooted in internal Christian developments following the Reformation, their formation and later articulation were shaped in part by external intellectual pressures—particularly from the Islamic doctrine of the Qur’an as the perfectly preserved Word of God. This thesis explores how Islamic ideology concerning the Qur’an’s verbal and textual perfection influenced certain Christian reactions, and how mainstream theology prevented the adoption of an entirely Islamic model of preservation.

The Islamic Doctrine of the Perfect Qur’an

From its inception, Islamic theology has asserted the Qur’an’s status as the verbum Dei in an absolute sense. According to Qur’an 15:9, “Indeed, We have sent down the Reminder, and indeed, We will guard it.” Classical theologians such as al-Juwaynī (d. 1085) and al-Bāqillānī (d. 1013) developed this claim into a full doctrine of taḥrīf al-naṣṣ denial—rejecting any notion that the Qur’an had suffered corruption (Burton 1977, 233–238). The Qur’an’s Arabic wording itself was considered divine, inimitable (iʿjāz al-Qur’ān), and unaltered since the time of its revelation through the angel Gabriel to Muḥammad. This conviction of perfect, verbal preservation became one of the defining characteristics of Islamic theology, distinguishing Islam from Judaism and Christianity, both of which were accused of textual corruption (taḥrīf).

By the 9th century, Muslims routinely employed the argument of the Qur’an’s incorruptibility as a polemical weapon against Christian apologists. Ibn Ḥazm (d. 1064) declared that the Bible’s textual plurality proved its falsification, while the Qur’an’s unity confirmed its divine protection (Thomas 1996, 43–47). This polemic would echo across centuries and resurface in the modern missionary encounters of the 19th century.

Christian Views of Inspiration and Preservation

Verbal Plenary Inspiration (VPI)

In Christian theology, verbal plenary inspiration refers to the belief that all parts of Scripture (plenary) and the very words (verbal) were inspired by God in their original autographs. The concept was already latent in patristic and medieval thought but was systematically articulated during the Protestant Reformation, particularly by theologians such as John Calvin and Francis Turretin (Helm 2004, 211). Scripture, though written by human authors, was viewed as fully the Word of God—an “incarnational” rather than dictational model of inspiration.

Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) and the Perfect TR

The doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation extends the logic of inspiration: if God inspired the words of Scripture, He must also have preserved them perfectly through history. This belief came to focus especially on the Textus Receptus (the “Received Text”), a 16th-century printed Greek text derived from Erasmus and later editions by Stephanus and Beza. Some theologians, particularly within conservative and King James Only circles, have claimed that this text represents the exact, providentially preserved Word of God (Hills 1956). The Perfect TR view thus mirrors, in Christian terms, the Islamic confidence in a single, uncorrupted text.

Historical Pathways of Influence

Medieval Encounters

Medieval Christian scholars engaged Islamic critics on the question of Scripture’s integrity. Writers such as Thomas Aquinas and Ricoldo da Montecroce acknowledged textual variations in the Bible but argued that these did not undermine the essential truth of revelation (Burman 2007, 95–99). However, they lacked a systematic doctrine of preservation. The Muslim critique of taḥrīf continued to circulate widely, maintaining intellectual pressure on Christian thinkers to defend the purity of the biblical text.

The Reformation and Early Modern Era

During the Reformation, Protestants elevated the authority of Scripture (Sola Scriptura) against Catholic reliance on tradition. The publication of Erasmus’s Novum Instrumentum (1516) and later the King James Version (1611) created a sense of possessing a stable and authoritative text. At the same time, Islamic empires were expanding, and Europeans were increasingly aware of Islam’s confident textual claims. The contrast between a Qur’an believed to be perfectly preserved and a Bible exhibiting textual diversity subtly encouraged Protestants to affirm divine providence in the transmission of their own text (Khan 2006, 112). Though the Reformers themselves did not teach mechanical preservation, the idea of a received and providentially protected text gradually took root.

Nineteenth-Century Missionary Context

The most direct influence of Islamic thought on Christian bibliology appeared in the 19th century through missionary apologetics. Missionaries such as Karl Pfander (1803–1865), author of The Mizān al-Ḥaqq (The Balance of Truth), debated Muslim scholars including Rahmat Allah al-Kairānawī, whose Izhar al-Haqq (1854) accused the Bible of corruption. In reply, Pfander and others insisted that God had preserved His Word, sometimes using language approaching verbal preservation (Powell 1993, 74–76).

The need to respond to the Islamic charge of taḥrīf pushed Christian apologists toward stronger claims of textual purity. For some, especially in the English-speaking missionary world, the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible became symbols of an unbroken, divine textual lineage—analogous to the Uthmānic Qur’an in Islam.

Dean Burgon and the Textual Reaction

In the later 19th century, scholars such as Dean John William Burgon (1813–1888) opposed modern textual critics like Westcott and Hort, who favored older manuscripts that differed from the TR. Burgon argued that God must have preserved His Word in the texts used by the historic church—the Majority Text (Burgon 1896, 12–15). Although Burgon operated within an Anglican framework rather than a polemical context with Islam, his insistence on perfect preservation of a traditional text resembled the logic of the Qur’anic model: divine authorship entails divine safeguarding.

Twentieth-Century Fundamentalism and the Perfect TR

The rise of fundamentalism in the early 20th century intensified the insistence on an inerrant, perfectly preserved Bible. Authors like Benjamin Wilkinson (Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, 1930), Edward F. Hills (The King James Version Defended, 1956), and later D. A. Waite argued that God’s promise to preserve His Word meant the Textus Receptus was identical to the autographs. In Muslim-majority contexts, missionaries and apologists also adopted this rhetoric to counter Qur’anic perfection claims.

The parallel structure is striking:

1. Verbal revelation of words, not just ideas;

2. Miraculous preservation by divine will;

3. The existence of one authoritative text form.
   This pattern mirrors the Islamic doctrine of revelation and preservation, transposed into Protestant bibliology.

Theological Prevention and Resistance

Despite these parallels, mainstream Christian theology consistently resisted adopting the fully Islamic model. The reasons are both theological and historical:

1. Incarnational View of Scripture — Unlike Islam’s dictational view, Christianity regards Scripture as both divine and human. God’s Word is expressed through human languages, cultures, and historical processes (cf. Luke 1:1–4). Variants and translation diversity therefore reflect its incarnational nature, not corruption.

2. Providential, Not Mechanical, Preservation — Theologians such as B. B. Warfield, F. F. Bruce, and Bruce Metzger emphasized that God preserved Scripture’s truth and message across the manuscript tradition, without requiring identical letter-for-letter transmission (Warfield 1948, 245–248; Bruce 1988, 99–102).

3. Textual Criticism as a Theological Discipline — Modern evangelical scholarship embraced textual criticism as a means of recovering, not undermining, the authentic text. This stands in contrast to the Islamic belief that any textual variation is a sign of corruption.

Thus, while Islamic confidence in perfect preservation indirectly encouraged Christian conservatives to assert similar claims, the broader Christian tradition prevented full convergence by maintaining the incarnational and historical character of revelation.

Conclusion

The Christian doctrines of Verbal Plenary Preservation and the Perfect Textus Receptus emerged within a complex interplay of internal theological logic and external apologetic pressure. Islam’s doctrine of the Qur’an as the verbally revealed and perfectly preserved Word of God provided both a challenge and a model—pressuring some Christians to defend the Bible with equally absolute claims. Figures such as Burgon, Pfander, and later TR defenders echoed Islamic-style certainty about the text’s perfection. Yet, the mainstream Christian tradition, grounded in the incarnational view of revelation and the providential understanding of textual transmission, prevented the adoption of a fully Islamic paradigm.

In the end, the influence of Islamic ideology was significant but not determinative: it sharpened Christian reflection on preservation, provoked apologetic formulations like VPP and Perfect TR, and yet also compelled theologians to articulate more clearly the distinctively Christian conviction that God’s Word remains infallible in truth, even when transmitted through the frailties of human history.

References 

• Bruce, F. F. 1988. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

• Burgon, John William. 1896. The Revision Revised. London: John Murray.

• Burton, John. 1977. The Collection of the Qur’an. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

• Burman, Thomas E. 2007. Reading the Qur’an in Latin Christendom, 1140–1560. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

• Helm, Paul. 2004. Calvin: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: T&T Clark.

• Hills, Edward F. 1956. The King James Version Defended. Des Moines: Christian Research Press.

• Khan, Geoffrey. 2006. “The Historical Development of the Text of the Hebrew Bible.” In Textual Criticism and Biblical Interpretation, 111–128. Leiden: Brill.

• Powell, Avril A. 1993. Muslims and Missionaries in Pre-Mutiny India. Richmond: Curzon Press.

• Thomas, David. 1996. Early Muslim Polemic Against Christianity: Abu Isa al-Warraq’s “Against the Incarnation”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

• Warfield, Benjamin B. 1948. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing.