A Pastoral Appeal Concerning The Teaching on Preservation

Jeffrey Khoo,

Grace and peace to you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I write to you not as an enemy, but as a fellow servant of Christ who trembles at His Word and longs to see His truth handled with reverence, accuracy, and humility. My purpose is pastoral, not polemical; corrective, not cruel; firm, yet brotherly.

I have carefully read your teaching concerning Verbal Plenary Preservation and the claim that God has preserved His Word in only one perfectly identifiable textual form, namely the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus, and that all who disagree are guilty of denying God’s faithfulness. After much prayer, study, and comparison with the Scriptures, I must lovingly but clearly tell you: this doctrine, as you teach it, goes beyond what Scripture itself teaches.

You rightly affirm the verbal and plenary inspiration of Scripture. On this we stand together. But you then bind men’s consciences to a conclusion Scripture never states—namely, that inspiration logically requires mechanical, word-for-word, letter-for-letter perfection in one historical manuscript line. This is not taught in Moses, the Prophets, Christ, or the Apostles. It is a theological inference elevated into dogma.

The Bible promises preservation, but it never defines it as flawless scribal transmission. God says His Word will not fail, not that every copyist will never err. He promises that His truth will endure, not that no textual variation will ever exist. To demand what God has not promised is not faith—it is presumption.

Our Lord and His apostles used existing copies and translations of Scripture, even when they differed in wording. Yet they still called them “Scripture” and treated them as the Word of God. Authority came from God speaking through His Word, not from identifying one perfect manuscript line.

I fear that in your zeal to honor Scripture, you have unintentionally shifted trust from the living God to a particular textual theory. You speak as though God’s faithfulness depends on our ability to locate one flawless textual family. But God’s faithfulness rests in Himself, not in our textual systems.

Worse still, you label brethren as enemies of Scripture simply because they will not bow to your theory. This wounds the body of Christ. It creates division where Scripture does not. It binds consciences where God has left liberty.

Brother, zeal is a gift—but zeal without knowledge can harm. Love for Scripture is holy—but love must walk with truth and humility. When you say, “All who deny VPP deny God’s Word,” you speak more harshly than Scripture itself.

I plead with you:

Return to the simplicity of Scripture.

Let God define preservation, not our systems.

Let faith rest in God, not in one edition.

Let brethren differ without being condemned as traitors to truth.

The Word of God is not weak because men are weak. It has survived empires, fires, swords, critics, and tyrants—not because of one textual family, but because God Himself watches over His Word.

May the Lord grant you a gentle heart, a teachable spirit, and a shepherd’s tenderness toward His flock. May He keep both of us from loving our positions more than His truth.

Your fellow servant in Christ,

kjv