Jesus’ silence about the Septuagint and other translations

Jesus’ silence about the Septuagint and other translations should make us cautious about treating Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) as a necessary Christian doctrine. Following Jesus’ example, we should uphold the authority of Scripture while distinguishing God’s inspired revelation from later manuscripts, editions, and translations.

What VPP claims

VPP generally teaches that God has preserved every word of the original biblical text without loss or error in a particular textual form—commonly the Masoretic Text for the Old Testament and the Textus Receptus for the New Testament—and that this text is represented especially by the King James Version.[singaporebpc.blogspot][truth]

This claim goes beyond saying that God has preserved Scripture’s message. It identifies a particular textual tradition as the perfectly preserved form of the original wording, sometimes treating other manuscripts and translations as corrupt or spiritually dangerous.[truthbpc][truth]

Jesus’ relevant example

Jesus clearly affirmed the authority and permanence of Scripture. He spoke of Scripture as God’s Word and treated it as decisive in answering theological and moral questions. However, the Gospel accounts do not record Him naming a single official translation, manuscript family, or textual edition as uniquely preserved.

Jesus also used Scripture in the linguistic and textual environment of His time. The New Testament’s Old Testament quotations sometimes agree closely with the Septuagint, sometimes resemble the Hebrew tradition, and sometimes reflect adaptation to the immediate context. Scholars therefore describe the relationship between the New Testament and the Septuagint with important qualifications rather than reducing it to “Jesus endorsed the Septuagint” or “Jesus rejected it.”[academic.oup][academic.oup]

The point is not that Jesus treated Scripture carelessly. Rather, He did not make loyalty to a particular translation or textual tradition the center of faith. His strongest criticisms were directed at religious traditions that obscured obedience to God, not at people who used a different legitimate language or textual form.

Inspiration and preservation

A helpful distinction is between inspiration, preservation, textual criticism, and translation.

Verbal plenary inspiration means that the whole biblical text, in all its words, was given by God through the human authors. Preservation means that God has not allowed His revelation to disappear from the church. Textual criticism compares manuscripts to identify the wording most likely to represent the original text. Translation communicates that text in another language.

The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy makes this distinction explicitly: inspiration applies strictly to the original writings, while copies and translations are God’s Word insofar as they faithfully represent those originals; it also says that textual criticism is necessary because God did not promise an error-free transmission process.[library.dts][josephholden]

This position does not deny divine preservation. It understands preservation providentially through the broad witness of manuscripts, ancient translations, quotations, and the continuing availability of Scripture—not necessarily through one flawless manuscript or one exclusively correct printed edition.

Why the argument is difficult

The central difficulty with strong VPP is historical: the Textus Receptus was compiled from a limited number of later Greek manuscripts, and the first printed editions contain places where the editors had limited manuscript evidence. It is therefore difficult to demonstrate that the TR is a complete, letter-for-letter reproduction of the apostolic autographs.

The existence of textual variants does not mean that the Bible has been lost. Most variants are minor differences in spelling, word order, or wording, and the overall teaching of the New Testament remains stable across the major textual traditions. But the existence of variants does challenge the claim that one later textual form can be proven to be the uniquely perfect preserved text.[gotquestions][singaporebpc.blogspot]

There is also a logical issue: even if one established the correct Hebrew and Greek text, that would not automatically make one English translation perfect. Translation requires interpretation, and the KJV translators themselves translated rather than mechanically reproduced the Hebrew and Greek.

How to respond biblically

You can affirm: 

God inspired the biblical authors verbally and completely. God has providentially preserved His Word for the church. The original wording can be recovered with substantial confidence through the manuscript evidence. No particular later manuscript tradition or English translation should be declared infallible without clear biblical and historical warrant.

That response respects Scripture’s authority while avoiding claims Jesus Himself did not make. It also allows Christians to appreciate the KJV, NIV, ESV, NASB, NRSVue, NKJV, and other translations according to their faithfulness and usefulness rather than judging them by whether they belong to one preferred tradition.

A gracious response to VPP advocates

When discussing VPP, avoid accusing every advocate of dishonesty or unbelief. Many supporters are motivated by a sincere desire to protect biblical authority in an age of skepticism. It is better to acknowledge that concern and then ask whether the doctrine itself is explicitly taught in Scripture and supported by the evidence.

You might respond:

“I believe every word of Scripture is inspired and that God has faithfully preserved His Word. But I do not see Jesus or the apostles identifying the Textus Receptus, the Masoretic Text, or the KJV as the only perfectly preserved form. Since the New Testament itself uses Scripture in translation and reflects more than one textual form, I prefer to trust God’s providential preservation through the whole manuscript witness rather than place infallibility in one later edition.”

The key Christian attitude is conviction without needless sectarianism. Follow Jesus by honoring Scripture, seeking truth carefully, rejecting human traditions that become absolute tests of faith, and speaking with humility where faithful Christians disagree.