Examine and amend a church's constitution that upholds verbal plenary preservation.
Critique and Correction
Clause 4.2.1.1
We believe in the divine, Verbal Plenary Inspiration (Autographs) and Verbal Plenary Preservation of the Scriptures (Apographs) in the original languages, their consequent inerrancy and infallibility, and as the perfect Word of God, the Supreme and final authority in faith and life (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21; Ps 12:6-7; Matt 5:18, 24:35);
Critique
This section starts well — affirming verbal plenary inspiration (i.e., that every word of Scripture, not just its general ideas, was inspired by God).
However, it introduces a serious theological confusion by pairing verbal plenary inspiration of the autographs (original manuscripts) with verbal plenary preservation of the apographs (copies).
While Scripture is divinely inspired in its original autographs, the doctrine of verbal plenary preservation — that every exact word is perfectly preserved without variation in later manuscripts — is not biblically or historically defensible. God preserved His Word in substance and truth, but not necessarily in identical letter-for-letter form in every manuscript.
Correction
We believe that the Scriptures were divinely inspired by God in their original writings (Autographs), that they are fully authoritative, inerrant, and infallible in all they affirm, and that through God’s providence, the Scriptures have been faithfully preserved in all ages so that God’s people still possess His true Word in every generation. The Scriptures remain the supreme and final authority for faith and life (2 Tim 3:16–17; 2 Pet 1:20–21; Matt 5:18; John 10:35).
Clause 4.2.1.2
We believe the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament underlying the Authorised (King James) Version to be the very Word of God, infallible and inerrant;
Critique
This clause makes the error of equating the Textus Receptus (TR) and Masoretic Text used in 1611 with the infallible originals.
However, the Textus Receptus is a later edition of Greek manuscripts — not the “original” New Testament text, and certainly not identical to it.
Modern textual criticism (using thousands more manuscripts, including much older ones) has shown that the TR is not superior, but merely one historical tradition among others (like the Byzantine and Alexandrian).
To restrict infallibility to the textual base of the KJV is to make a translation tradition rather than the inspired autographs the final authority.
Correction
We believe that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew (with small portions in Aramaic) and the New Testament in Greek, and that these original-language texts, as preserved in the total manuscript tradition, are the inspired and authoritative Word of God. We affirm that faithful translations of these Scriptures truly communicate God’s Word to His people.
Clause 4.2.1.3
We uphold the Authorised (King James) Version to be The Word of God – the best, most faithful, most accurate, most beautiful translation of the Bible in the English language, and do employ it alone as our primary scriptural text in the public reading, preaching, and teaching of the English Bible;
Critique
This clause confuses translation preference with doctrinal truth.
While the King James Version is a remarkable literary achievement and a faithful translation for its time, claiming it is the most faithful or accurate translation — and therefore to be used alone — is untenable and sectarian.
Language changes; better manuscripts have been discovered; and new translations (like the ESV, NIV, NASB, CSB, etc.) accurately reflect the same inspired message for modern readers.
No single English translation is “perfect.” God’s Word is perfect — not our translations.
Correction
We affirm that faithful translations of Scripture, such as the ESV, NIV, NASB, and others, accurately communicate God’s inspired Word to English readers. While we respect the historical value of the King James Version, we do not regard any one translation as uniquely inspired or superior in authority. All faithful translations serve the Church in making God’s Word known.
The True Meaning of Possessing a Bible
To “possess” a Bible is not merely to own a physical book, but to have in one’s hands God’s living Word — the revelation of Himself, His redemptive plan, and His will for humanity.
The power of Scripture does not depend on ink, manuscript tradition, or translation; it depends on the Spirit who inspired it and illumines the reader’s heart (1 Cor 2:12–14; Heb 4:12).
The Church’s confidence is not in a particular version of the Bible but in the God who speaks faithfully through His Word.
Thus, to possess a Bible — in any faithful translation — is to hold the voice of God, able to make one wise unto salvation (2 Tim 3:15).
How We Should Read the NIV and ESV
Both the NIV and ESV are accurate, faithful, and trustworthy translations based on the best available Hebrew and Greek texts.
-
The NIV uses dynamic equivalence: it seeks to express the meaning of the text in natural modern English, prioritizing clarity and readability.
-
The ESV uses essentially literal or formal equivalence: it stays close to the wording and structure of the original languages, prioritizing precision and word-for-word faithfulness.
Both approaches have merit.
A healthy approach is to read both — using the ESV for study and the NIV for devotional reading or evangelism — understanding that both convey the same inspired truth.
Summary of the Corrected and Balanced Doctrine
We believe that the Scriptures, as originally given, are the divinely inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God. God has faithfully preserved His Word through the manuscript tradition, so that His truth is accessible in every generation. The Bible, rightly translated, remains the supreme authority in faith and life. We honor faithful translations such as the KJV, ESV, NIV, and others as true witnesses to God’s Word, recognizing that no single translation holds exclusive authority, for the authority belongs to the inspired Word itself, not any one version.
No comments:
Post a Comment