This response provides a deep theological and scholarly refutation of the article posted on https://www.truthbpc.com/v4/main.php?menu=resources&page=resources/vpp_07 on Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) and the exclusive superiority of the King James Bible (KJB)
A Theological Refutation of King James Only and Verbal Plenary Preservation Teaching
Introduction: When Zeal Exceeds Knowledge
The Gravity of False Teaching
The apostle Paul warned Timothy with sobering words: "Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee" (1 Timothy 4:16). Doctrine matters. What we teach about God's Word directly impacts how God's people relate to Scripture and to one another.
The article we are examining makes extraordinary claims that demand careful theological examination. It asserts that God has preserved every jot and tittle of Scripture in one specific manuscript tradition (the Textus Receptus), that this tradition alone underlies a faithful English Bible (the King James Version), and that rejecting this view means "effectively rejecting the faithful KJB" and aligning with "corrupt texts" produced by "unregenerate men," "false prophets," and "ravening wolves."
These are not minor disagreements about translation philosophy. The article questions the salvation of Westcott and Hort, calls modern Bible translations "deadly medicine," suggests that Christians who use other versions are spiritually deceived, and warns that rejecting Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) undermines "the very foundation of the Christian faith."
Such severe charges require us to "prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). We must examine these claims with the same care we would give any doctrine that claims biblical authority.
The Central Issue: Adding to God's Word
At the heart of this controversy lies a fundamental question: Has God revealed a doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation in Scripture, or is VPP a human tradition being elevated to the status of biblical truth?
Proverbs 30:5-6 warns us with crystal clarity: "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
We must ask: Does the Bible actually teach that God has preserved every letter of Scripture in identical form across all manuscripts throughout history? Or is this doctrine an addition to what God has revealed?
What We Are NOT Saying
Before proceeding further, we must clearly state what this refutation does NOT claim:
We are NOT attacking the King James Bible. The KJV is a faithful, beautiful translation that has served English-speaking Christians for over four centuries. Many believers read it profitably, and we honor their choice. Our critique is not of the KJV but of the unbiblical doctrines attached to it.
We are NOT denying biblical inspiration. We fully affirm 2 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God." The original autographs were breathed out by God, without error, and fully authoritative.
We are NOT denying biblical inerrancy. The original manuscripts were without error in all they affirmed. God's Word is truth (John 17:17).
We are NOT denying that God has preserved His Word. God has indeed preserved His Word through history. Our disagreement is with HOW the article claims this preservation occurred.
We are NOT suggesting all translations are equally good. Translation quality matters. Faithful scholarship, sound methodology, and theological integrity all affect translation quality.
We are NOT being disrespectful toward Scripture. On the contrary, our refutation stems from deep reverence for God's Word. We refuse to add to Scripture or make it teach what it does not say.
What We ARE Affirming
As we undertake this refutation, we simultaneously affirm positive biblical truths:
We affirm God's sovereign providence in preserving His Word through thousands of manuscripts across multiple geographical regions and historical periods.
We affirm the remarkable reliability of the biblical text, with over 99% agreement among manuscripts on the wording of the New Testament.
We affirm that faithful Bible translations based on sound textual scholarship and translation principles faithfully communicate God's Word in English.
We affirm the sufficiency of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17) for all matters of faith and practice, regardless of which faithful translation one reads.
We affirm the Holy Spirit's work in illuminating Scripture to believers (John 16:13; 1 Corinthians 2:10-14).
We affirm Christian unity based on essential gospel truths, not on manuscript traditions or translation preferences (Ephesians 4:3-6).
The Scope of This Refutation
This paper will systematically examine and refute the major errors in the article:
First, we will expose how VPP teaching adds to Scripture by claiming God made promises He never actually made about manuscript preservation.
Second, we will correct the historical misrepresentations about manuscripts, textual criticism, and the development of English Bible translations.
Third, we will address the unjust character attacks against faithful Christian scholars, showing how the article violates the ninth commandment's prohibition against bearing false witness.
Fourth, we will demonstrate how key biblical passages are misinterpreted and misapplied to support VPP.
Fifth, we will refute the claims of "four-fold superiority" for the KJV, showing them to be historically inaccurate and logically flawed.
Sixth, we will expose the harmful practical consequences of this teaching for Christian faith, unity, and witness.
The Real Danger
Ironically, a teaching that claims to defend Scripture actually undermines genuine faith by:
- Setting believers up for crisis when they inevitably discover that manuscript variations exist
- Making faith dependent on accepting unbiblical claims about preservation
- Dividing the body of Christ over non-essential issues
- Bearing false witness against faithful scholars and fellow believers
- Creating unnecessary barriers to reading and trusting God's Word
The real threat to biblical authority comes not from honest textual scholarship but from those who add doctrines to Scripture that God never revealed.
A Call to Biblical Thinking
Romans 12:2 exhorts us: "Be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."
The VPP/KJV-Only movement often appeals to tradition, emotion, and rhetoric rather than sound biblical exegesis. We must renew our minds by asking:
- What does Scripture actually say?
- What does the historical evidence show?
- Does this teaching promote truth and unity?
- Are we adding to God's Word?
The Foundation We Stand Upon
Our confidence in Scripture does not rest on VPP. It rests on:
God's character - He is faithful and true (Deuteronomy 7:9; Revelation 19:11)
God's promises - His Word will endure forever (Isaiah 40:8; Matthew 24:35; 1 Peter 1:25)
God's providence - He works all things according to His counsel (Ephesians 1:11)
The evidence God has provided - Thousands of manuscripts testifying to the reliability of Scripture
The Holy Spirit's ministry - Illuminating truth to believers (John 14:26; 16:13)
This foundation is solid. VPP is not needed to strengthen it and actually weakens confidence by making false claims.
Moving Forward in Truth and Love
Ephesians 4:15 calls us to speak "the truth in love." This refutation seeks to do both:
Truth - Exposing error, correcting misrepresentation, and establishing what Scripture actually teaches
Love - Extending charity to those who hold VPP views while firmly opposing the doctrine itself
Our goal is not to win arguments but to establish truth, promote unity, and strengthen genuine confidence in God's Word as He has actually preserved it.
Why This Matters
Some might ask: "Why spend time refuting this teaching? Can't we just agree to disagree?"
We must address VPP/KJV-Only teaching because:
Truth is at stake. When false doctrines are taught as biblical truth, God's people are misled.
Unity is threatened. This teaching divides believers over non-essential issues.
Witness is harmed. When Christians insist only one 17th-century translation is trustworthy, it makes the gospel appear narrow and unreasonable.
Faith is undermined. When people discover VPP claims don't match reality, their confidence in Scripture can be shaken.
God's character is misrepresented. VPP suggests God failed if manuscripts aren't identical, when God's actual method demonstrates His wisdom and power.
A Prayer for Wisdom
James 1:5 promises: "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him."
As we undertake this examination, we pray:
- That God would be glorified as we handle His Word accurately
- That truth would prevail over tradition and preference
- That believers would grow in genuine confidence in Scripture
- That unity would be strengthened in Christ's body
- That those who have been troubled by VPP teaching would find peace
Let us proceed, then, to examine these claims in light of Scripture, history, and sound reasoning..
A Critical Theological Response to the Doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP)
The article presented, "The King James Bible and the Doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation," argues for a specific view of bibliology that equates the preservation of God’s Word exclusively with the Hebrew and Greek texts underlying the King James Version. As a fellow theologian, I will address the systematic and textual-critical concerns raised by this document, refuting its claims through the lens of historical orthodoxy and textual science.
I. Refuting the Concept of Perfect Manuscript Underlying the KJV
The article posits that VPP proponents believe God has preserved "100% Perfect Hebrew and Greek words" specifically in those texts that "underlie the King James Bible".
The Textus Receptus (TR) Reality: The Greek text underlying the KJB, known as the Textus Receptus, was not a single, divinely "dropped-from-heaven" document. It was compiled by Desiderius Erasmus in the early 16th century using a small handful of late medieval manuscripts (predominantly 12th century or later).
Logical Inconsistency: The article admits the "autographs are long gone." To claim that a specific 16th-century compilation is "100% perfect" essentially argues for a "double inspiration" or a "second-tier inspiration" of the editors (like Erasmus or Beza), a doctrine not found in Scripture.
The "Platinum Ruler" Fallacy: The article compares the original language words to a "perfect platinum ruler" and the KJB to a "common ruler." However, the Textus Receptus itself contains readings (such as the Comma Johanneum in 1 John 5:7) that are absent from the vast majority of Greek manuscripts, including the very Byzantine manuscripts VPP proponents often claim to champion.
II. Refuting the Attack on Modern Textual Criticism
The article characterizes modern Greek texts (Nestle-Aland) as "corrupt" and their editors as "unbelievers" and "apostates"
Ad Hominem vs. Evidence: The document focuses heavily on the personal beliefs of Westcott and Hort. In scholarship, the validity of a textual variant is determined by manuscript evidence (papyri, uncials, lectionaries), not the personal piety of the scholars who catalog them.
Older is Not More Corrupt: The article quotes John Burgon to argue that the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were preserved only because of their "evil character" and lack of use. This is a speculative argument. In textual criticism, older manuscripts (dating to the 4th century) are generally closer to the original autographs than the 12th-century manuscripts used for the TR.
The Providential Preservation of All Manuscripts: God’s "singular care and providence" is seen in the discovery of thousands of manuscripts (like the Dead Sea Scrolls and early Papyri) that were unavailable to the 1611 translators. Restricting "preservation" to the TR actually ignores the vast majority of God’s preserved manuscript evidence.
III. Refuting the "Superiority" of Translation Technique
The article argues that the KJV's "Formal Equivalence" (word-for-word) is inherently superior to "Dynamic Equivalence" (thought-for-thought).
The Nature of Language: All translation requires some level of dynamic equivalence because languages do not map 1:1 in syntax or idiom. Even the KJV uses italics to denote words added by translators to make English sense—a form of "dynamic" intervention.
Misrepresentation of Eugene Nida: The article labels Eugene Nida an "infidel" and "unregenerate." This is a theological overreach. Functional equivalence is a linguistic tool used to ensure the meaning of the Word is accessible to the reader, fulfilling the Great Commission's requirement to reach every "tongue" and "nation."
IV. Addressing Alleged Theological Deficiencies
The article claims modern versions "eliminate" or "alter" doctrines like the Trinity and the Deity of Christ.
1 John 5:7-8 (The Trinity): The article cites the removal of the "three that bear record in heaven" as a corruption. Scholarship shows this phrase is not found in any Greek manuscript before the 10th century (and only in a few late ones). Removing it is not an attack on the Trinity; it is an act of textual honesty to what the Apostle John actually wrote.
Luke 2:22 (The Sinlessness of Christ): The article argues that changing "her purification" to "their purification" makes Jesus a sinner. However, under Mosaic Law (Leviticus 12), the "purification" referred to the mother and the ritual standing of the family unit. The plural "their" is found in the majority of manuscripts and does not imply personal sin in the infant Christ.
Doctrine is Preserved: No major Christian doctrine is lost in modern translations. In many cases, modern versions strengthen the deity of Christ (e.g., Titus 2:13, where many modern versions are more explicit than the KJV).
Comparison of Textual Philosophies
| Feature | Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) | Providential Preservation (Scholarship) |
| Locus of Preservation | Limited to the Textus Receptus and Masoretic Text. | Found in the sum total of all surviving manuscripts. |
| View of Manuscripts | Later manuscripts (Byzantine) are better; early ones are "corrupt." | Earlier manuscripts are generally preferred as being closer to the source. |
| Translation Goal | Rigid Formal Equivalence. | Accuracy in both form and meaning (context-dependent). |
| Theology | Changes in text = "perversion" of doctrine. | Changes in text = "restoration" of the original apostolic word. |
The Danger of VPP
The VPP position, as outlined in this article, inadvertently creates a "paper pope" in the 1611 KJV and its 16th-century Greek sources. By claiming that God’s Word was "lost" or "hidden" until the TR was compiled, or that only one English version is "God's perfect Prescription," the proponents of this view come dangerously close to the very "private interpretation" they seek to avoid.
True theological scholarship recognizes that God has preserved His Word through the entirety of the manuscript tradition, and that our understanding grows as He brings more of that evidence to light.
Returning to Solid Ground
Summary of What We Have Demonstrated
Through careful examination of the VPP/KJV-Only teaching presented in this article, we have demonstrated several critical truths:
1. VPP Is Not a Biblical Doctrine
Despite numerous appeals to Scripture, we have shown that:
- No biblical passage teaches that every manuscript must be identical
- Verses like Matthew 5:18 and Psalm 12:6-7 speak of God's Word's authority and endurance, not mechanical manuscript preservation
- VPP is eisegesis—reading a doctrine into Scripture rather than drawing it from Scripture
- The teaching adds to God's Word by claiming promises He never made
2. The Historical Claims Are False
The article's representation of textual history is demonstrably inaccurate:
- The Textus Receptus is not "the traditional text" but one late compilation based on a handful of manuscripts
- Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are valuable ancient witnesses, not uniquely corrupt documents
- The claim that these manuscripts were preserved because they were "bad" contradicts both logic and evidence
- The "majority text" does not perfectly agree with the TR in hundreds of places
- The history of English Bible translation is far more complex than presented
3. The Character Attacks Are Unjust
The article violates the ninth commandment by:
- Falsely claiming Westcott and Hort were "unregenerate" and "false prophets"
- Misrepresenting the beliefs and work of textual scholars
- Bearing false witness against faithful Christians who use other translations
- Questioning the salvation of brothers and sisters in Christ over non-essential issues
We must note: Even if Westcott and Hort held theological errors (which some claim), this does not invalidate their textual scholarship. The manuscript evidence exists independently of their personal beliefs. To reject evidence because we disagree with someone's theology is to commit the genetic fallacy.
4. The "Four-Fold Superiority" Claims Are Unfounded
The article's claims about superior texts, translators, techniques, and theology fail examination:
Texts: The TR is not demonstrably superior to other manuscript traditions; it's based on fewer and later manuscripts than modern critical texts.
Translators: While the KJV translators were skilled scholars, so are modern translation teams. Scholarship has advanced significantly in 400 years.
Technique: "Formal equivalence" and "dynamic equivalence" are both legitimate translation approaches with different purposes. Neither is inherently unfaithful.
Theology: The examples given (1 John 5:7, 2 Peter 3:10, Luke 2:22) represent textual variants, not theological corruption. No major Christian doctrine depends on disputed variants.
5. The Teaching Creates Division and Harm
VPP/KJV-Only teaching:
- Divides believers over non-essential issues
- Questions the faith of Christians who use other translations
- Creates unnecessary barriers to Bible reading and study
- Undermines confidence when people discover manuscript variations exist
- Harms Christian witness by appearing narrow and unreasonable
The Fundamental Error: Confusing Categories
At its core, VPP teaching confuses distinct theological concepts:
Inspiration (how God originally gave Scripture) ≠ Transmission (how manuscripts were copied)
Inerrancy (original texts had no errors) ≠ Identical Preservation (all copies match perfectly)
Authority (Scripture's binding truth) ≠ Translation (rendering into another language)
Providence (God's faithful oversight) ≠ Mechanical Perfection (miraculous identical copying)
These are related concepts, but conflating them creates theological confusion and harmful conclusions.
What God Actually Promises
When we examine Scripture honestly and carefully, we find that God promises:
The Endurance of His Word
- Isaiah 40:8 - "The word of our God shall stand for ever"
- Matthew 24:35 - "My words shall not pass away"
- 1 Peter 1:25 - "The word of the Lord endureth for ever"
These passages teach that God's revelation—His truth, His message—will endure. They do not promise that every manuscript will be identical.
The Reliability of His Word
- Psalm 19:7 - "The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul"
- Proverbs 30:5 - "Every word of God is pure"
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17 - Scripture makes us "thoroughly furnished unto all good works"
These passages describe Scripture's character and effectiveness, not the process of manuscript transmission.
The Power of His Word
- Isaiah 55:11 - "My word...shall not return unto me void"
- Hebrews 4:12 - "The word of God is quick, and powerful"
- Romans 1:16 - The gospel "is the power of God unto salvation"
These passages affirm Scripture's power to accomplish God's purposes, not a specific preservation methodology.
God has kept all these promises—but through His providential care over multiple manuscript traditions, not through VPP's claimed mechanical perfection.
What God Has Actually Done
Rather than the narrow preservation VPP claims, God has actually demonstrated His wisdom and power through:
1. Abundant Manuscript Evidence
God has provided:
- Over 5,800 Greek New Testament manuscripts
- Over 10,000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts
- Thousands of manuscripts in other ancient languages
- Over 1 million quotations from church fathers
This abundance allows scholars to identify scribal errors through comparison—far superior to relying on a single "perfect" manuscript.
2. Geographical Distribution
Manuscripts were copied and preserved across multiple regions:
- Alexandria (Egypt)
- Antioch (Syria)
- Caesarea (Palestine)
- Constantinople (Byzantine Empire)
- Western Europe
This distribution makes it virtually impossible for the text to be corrupted universally, as different regions preserve different readings that can be compared.
3. Early Attestation
We have manuscripts and fragments dating to within decades of the original writings:
- P52 (John) - early 2nd century
- P46 (Pauline epistles) - early 3rd century
- P66, P75 (Gospels) - late 2nd/early 3rd century
These early witnesses allow us to see what the text looked like very close to the time of composition.
4. Multiple Translation Traditions
Early translations into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and other languages provide independent witnesses to the Greek text, offering additional evidence for determining original readings.
5. Patristic Quotations
Church fathers quoted Scripture extensively. These quotations provide another independent witness to the biblical text and help date when certain readings existed.
This is God's actual method of preservation—and it is magnificent. It demonstrates divine wisdom in providing multiple, independent witnesses rather than a single point of failure. It shows God working through ordinary means (scribes, scholars, translators) to accomplish His purposes.
The Better Way: Biblical Confidence
Instead of the false confidence VPP offers (based on unbiblical claims), we can have genuine, biblical confidence:
We Trust God's Providence
Proverbs 16:33 - "The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD"
God works through ordinary means—human scribes, scholars, and translators—to preserve His Word. This demonstrates His power more remarkably than mechanical perfection would.
We Trust the Evidence God Has Provided
Acts 17:11 - The Bereans "searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so"
We need not fear honest examination of manuscripts. The evidence God has given us confirms Scripture's reliability.
We Trust the Holy Spirit's Work
John 16:13 - "When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth"
The Holy Spirit illuminates God's Word to believers, regardless of which faithful translation they read.
We Trust Scripture's Power
1 Thessalonians 2:13 - "The word of God...effectually worketh also in you that believe"
God's Word accomplishes His purposes through its inherent power, not through a particular manuscript tradition.
The Danger VPP Teaching
There is genuine danger in VPP/KJV-Only teaching:
1. It Divides Christ's Body
Believers who love Jesus, trust Scripture, and seek to follow God are told they're using "corrupt" Bibles and compared to those taking "deadly medicine." This violates Christ's prayer for unity (John 17:21) and Paul's command to "keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3).
2. It Bears False Witness
Calling dedicated Christian scholars "unregenerate," "false prophets," and "ravening wolves" violates the ninth commandment. Even if we disagree with someone's conclusions, we must not bear false witness about their character and salvation.
3. It Creates Unnecessary Obstacles
When non-Christians hear that they must read a 400-year-old English translation or they're not getting God's true Word, it creates an unnecessary barrier to the gospel. The Great Commission commands us to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:19-20), not to make them all read 17th-century English.
4. It Undermines Real Faith
When believers taught VPP discover that manuscripts actually do vary, their faith can be shaken—not because God failed, but because they were taught something false. Real faith should rest on God's actual promises, not on claims He never made.
5. It Misses God's Greater Glory
VPP imagines God's preservation as mechanical perfection in one manuscript line. God's actual method—preserving His Word through thousands of manuscripts across centuries and continents, allowing us to reconstruct the original text with remarkable precision—displays far greater wisdom and power.
Practical Application
For Those Who Love the KJV:
You can continue reading and cherishing your King James Bible. It is a faithful, beautiful translation. But you need not:
- Believe it's the ONLY accurate translation
- Think other believers are unfaithful for using different versions
- Accept VPP as biblical doctrine
- Fear that manuscript variations threaten God's Word
Read your KJV with joy and confidence, while extending charity to brothers and sisters who prefer other faithful translations.
For Those Who Use Other Translations:
You can read your ESV, NIV, NASB, CSB, NKJV, or other scholarly translation with full confidence, knowing:
- God has preserved His Word through abundant manuscript evidence
- Faithful scholars have worked diligently to provide accurate translations
- The Holy Spirit illuminates truth through His Word
- Your faith doesn't depend on manuscript families
Read your preferred translation faithfully, while respecting those who prefer the KJV.
For All Believers:
Let us:
- Focus on reading, studying, and obeying God's Word rather than arguing about manuscripts
- Pursue unity in essential doctrines while allowing liberty in non-essentials
- Trust God's providence without demanding unbiblical proofs
- Extend charity to all who love Christ and His Word
- Combat genuine error while refusing to create false tests of orthodoxy
The Call to Unity
Ephesians 4:3-6 exhorts us: "Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."
Our unity is based on:
- One Lord (Jesus Christ)
- One faith (the gospel)
- One baptism (into Christ's body)
- One God and Father
Our unity is NOT based on:
- One manuscript tradition
- One translation
- One view of preservation methodology
Romans 14:1-4 warns against judging brothers over disputable matters. Manuscript preference is precisely such a disputable matter. We must not destroy fellowship over it.
The Greater Truth
The real issue is not whether God preserved His Word, but HOW He did so.
VPP claims God did it through mechanical perfection in one manuscript line. The evidence shows God did it through:
- Multiple manuscript families providing independent witnesses
- Geographical distribution preventing universal corruption
- Early attestation allowing verification close to original composition
- Comparative analysis enabling identification of scribal errors
- Faithful scholarship serving the church across centuries
Which demonstrates God's power more magnificently? Which provides better evidence? Which shows greater wisdom?
God's actual method is MORE glorious than VPP's claims, precisely because it works through human means while achieving divine purposes with remarkable precision.
A Warning Against Adding to Scripture
Deuteronomy 4:2 - "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it"
Proverbs 30:6 - "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar"
Revelation 22:18 - "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book"
These warnings are serious. VPP teaching adds to Scripture by:
- Teaching preservation promises God never made
- Creating doctrines Scripture doesn't establish
- Making manuscript tradition a divine command
- Claiming certainty where God has not spoken
We must be content with what God has actually revealed, not adding our own requirements to His Word.
The Final Word
In refuting VPP/KJV-Only teaching, we have not attacked the Bible—we have defended it from those who would add to it. We have not undermined confidence in Scripture—we have shown why confidence should rest on God's actual promises rather than unbiblical claims.
The Word of God stands firm.
Not because of VPP. Not because of any one manuscript tradition. Not because of any single translation.
But because God Himself has promised to preserve His truth, and He has kept that promise through:
- Abundant manuscript evidence
- Providential oversight of transmission
- Faithful scholarship serving the church
- The illuminating work of His Spirit
Our final exhortation:
2 Timothy 2:15 - "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth"
Let us:
- Study God's Word diligently
- Handle it accurately and honestly
- Trust God's actual promises
- Extend charity to all believers
- Pursue truth and unity
- Reject additions to Scripture
- Rest confidently in God's faithfulness
The promises we CAN trust:
Psalm 119:89 - "For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven"
Isaiah 40:8 - "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever"
Matthew 24:35 - "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away"
1 Peter 1:23-25 - "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever...But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you"
These promises God has kept—and will keep—forever. We can trust them completely.
May God grant us wisdom to rightly divide His Word, humility to acknowledge where we've added to it, charity to extend to all His people, and faithfulness to believe, study, and obey the Scripture He has so graciously and providentially preserved for us.
To God alone be the glory, forever and ever. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment