SCHISM

The Greek word schisma literally denotes a rent, or cleft (cf. Matt. 9:16; Mark 2:21); hence metaphorically, discord or division (John 7:43; 9:16; 10:19). This is its meaning in 1 Cor. 1:10; 11:18; 12:25.
1 Corinthians 12:25 is vital to a proper understanding of a schism: “That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.” Thus, schism is a rending of the body of Christ. It is a sin that exhibits a carelessness about the welfare of the body in general and its other members in particular. It is a sin against charity, a selfish introduction of dissention and division where there ought to be mutual tolerance and love.
This distinguishes schism from scriptural separation.* Scripturally, heretics (see Heresy) must be rejected (Titus 3:10) for they are schismatics from the body of true believers, having followed a self-willed opinion in preference to God’s revealed truth. Thus, separation from a communion on the grounds of the purity of fundamental Christian doctrine is not schism. For example, Calvin argued that the scriptural marks of a true church are the preaching of the pure gospel and the valid administration of the sacraments. Rome did not maintain these basic marks of a true church. Therefore, in separating from her the Reformers were not guilty of schism. Rome was the party, or sect, guilty of schism, for she had departed from the faith of the gospel.
The same argument holds good today. In an age when ecumenism is rampant, those who stand for Biblical separation are denounced as schismatics and are frequently likened to such sects as the Donatists.* But no Christian can deny that the ecumenical movement progresses by compromising the essentials of the gospel. Christians should therefore separate from ecumenical churches. The same goes for churches where modernism* and liberalism* dominate.
It is not right to remain in such fellowships merely because they nominally retain their ancient confessional standards. The argument is frequently put, for example, that while a Presbyterian church retains the Westminster Standards, it would be schism to separate from it. However, when the Reformers separated from Rome, she avowed her acceptance of the ancient creeds of the church. But that did not make her a pure church. It merely denoted the fact that lying and falsehood were added to her other impurities. Calvin said, “If the Church is ‘the pillar and ground of truth’ (1 Tim. 3:15), it is certain that there is no church where lying and falsehood have usurped the ascendancy.” If that was true of Rome with her professed acceptance of the ancient creeds of the church, it is no less true of those once Protestant churches that are seeking reunion with an unrepentant Rome, or are open to all great doctrinal impurity.
To sum up: schism is an expression of self-will or of heresy that leads to the setting up of sects—any group that is built on heresy is a schism from the body of Christ. Separation is on Biblical grounds, is commanded by the Lord (Eph. 5:11; 2 Cor. 6:14–18; 1 Tim. 6:3–5), and aims at maintaining essential Christian doctrine and practice.


Alan Cairns, Dictionary of Theological Terms (Belfast; Greenville, SC: Ambassador Emerald International, 2002), 404–405.

What is Bible Presbyterian Church

A small Presbyterian denomination born out of the modernist-fundamentalist controversy. In 1936 The Presbyterian Church of America (later Orthodox Presbyterian Church) was founded by a small group of pastors and elders who left the Presbyterian Church-U.S.A. The immediate cause for this exodus was the suspension of J. Gresham Machen and J. Oliver Buswell, Jr., from the Presbyterian ministry due to their support of an independent mission board that sought to insure biblical teaching on Presbyterian mission fields. The newly formed denomination was soon drawn into internal conflict. Genuine differences in doctrine, ethics and church government, coupled with suspicions and disagreements, led Buswell, Carl McIntire, Allan MacRae and others to separate and form the Bible Presbyterian Church (BPC) in 1937.
At its first synod the BPC amended the Westminster standards to teach premillennialism. A piety which included alcoholic abstinence was enjoined, and a church government allowing greater freedom to the local church and both independent and church-controlled agencies was established. The chief characteristic was a self-conscious denominational “testimony” for the Bible and Jesus Christ, which issued in separatist stance calling for separation from apostasy as well as from those having fellowship with apostates. This ultimately isolated the BPC and hindered evangelistic efforts.
The BPC was originally supportive of the American and International Councils of Christian Churches (ACCC; ICCC) presided over by Carl McIntire. Disagreement during the 1950s over the denomination’s association with the ACCC and ICCC and the autonomy of BPC agencies led to the withdrawal of McIntire and others at the 1956 General Assembly to form the Bible Presbyterian Church, Collingswood Synod. The majority continued as the Bible Presbyterian Church, Columbus Synod, until 1961, when the denomination changed its name to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC). In 1965 the EPC then merged with the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America, General Synod, to form the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.    G. P. Hutchinson, The History Behind the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod (1974); The Constitution of the Bible Presbyterian Church (1946).


Daniel G. Reid et al., Dictionary of Christianity in America (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990).

Unity

Unity
    Unity among believers pleases God (Psalm 133:1)
    Christians are not supposed to live in isolation (John 17:11)
    Unity includes bearing one another’s joys and burdens (Romans 12:9–16)
    Believers must seek unity in all essentials (1 Corinthians 1:10)
    There can be great unity even in great diversity (Ephesians 4:3–13)
    The love Christ commanded should create unity among believers (Philippians 1:3–11)
    Unity ought to be a distinctive mark among Christians (Philippians 2:1–2)


Tyndale House Publishers, Holy Bible: New Living Translation (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2013).

Fellowship

Fellowship is impossible between those who have varying opinions and viewpoints concerning Jesus Christ, His person and work. But a church is unfaithful when it unites with that which calls itself a fellowship, when true fellowship is impossible.

Mcintire, n.d.

Karate Kids in Bible Presbyterian Church

Jeffrey
Charles
Suan Yew
Prabudas Koshy
Collin

There all good in kong fu fighting.

Fighting until today, no end.

Loving in BP Club

One day, Bro. Jeffrey Khoo and Bro. Charles Seets went to a club, after some glasses of wine, they were drunk, Jeffrey said to Charles, "I love you" and punched Charles' face fiercely. Charles then say to Jeffrey, "I love you too." Then he punched back Jeffrey forcefully.

After that Jeffrey pinched Charles on the ground, and said. "I love you." Grabbing Charles' neck and punched his nose until bleeding. 

Then Charles fought back, and said, "I love you too." He twisted Jeffrey's arm and broke Jeffrey's hands, and then Charles punched Jeffrey's face with his hand until one eye bleeding.

When the master came, both of them are scared to death, in the end they hugged each other and cry bitterly!

This is the way they loved each other in BP Club

Weird but true!

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." John 13:34

Introducing a friendly Church

https://www.gracebpc.org.sg/

Above All

Against VPP

http://valiantfortruth.tripod.com/

ESV study bible

http://esvstudybible.org/

Unity

B-P Pastors and Leaders Retreat

B-P Pastors and Leaders Retreat, 13-14 July 2015. Theme: "Building and Bonding" at Pulai Springs Resort.

I wish all of you, peace and "Faith, Hope, Love." The greatest is love......love one another, so that the world may know you are my disciples.

Both will cancel each other

Life Bible-Presbyterian Church and Far Eastern Bible College will cancel one another!

Number of full time student in Far Eastern Bible College will reduce 30%

Numbers of student in ERBL Lecture in Life Bible-Presbyterian Church will reduce another 30%

The rest of the 40% will go to Singapore Bible College...........

Both ERBL and Far Eastern Bible College are losers..........

At last, Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore will learn a lesson,

HUMBLENESS.......

And at last they are on the track to become "Evangelical Christian" 

Bible-Presbyterian Church reap what they sow

Bible-Presbyterian Church likes to attack other denominations,

so this is what they reap,

now they have to live with heretics in Giltead Road, Singapore.

To teach them a lesson, "next time, mind your own business!!!!!"

When you come to Gilstead Road, Singapore

When you meet some one in Life Bible-Presbyterian Church in Gilstead Road, Singapore, you better ask him or her, "To whom you are following, Jeffrey Khoo or Charles Seet?"

Some will say, "I follow Jeffrey Khoo." Some will say, “I follow Charles Seet." Some will say, "I follow Timothy Tow." Some will say, "I am for Verbal Plenary Preservation." Some will say, "I am against Verbal Plenary Preservation." Some will say, "I follow Christ." Some will say, "I am neutral." Some will say, "No comment."

Divisions!There are divisions in one small piece of land, Gilstead Road, Singapore!

Listen, what Paul wrote in his first letter to the Corinthians.


1Co 1:11  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. 

1Co 1:12  Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
 
1Co 1:13  Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 

1Co 3:1  And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 

1Co 3:3  For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? 

1Co 3:4  For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? 

Commentary of 1 Corinthians 3:4 

For when one saith (hotan gar legēi tis). Indefinite temporal clause with the present subjunctive of repetition (Robertson, Grammar, p. 972). Each instance is a case in point and proof abundant of the strife.

Of Paul (Paulou). Predicate genitive, belong to Paul, on Paul’s side. 

Of Apollos (Apollō). Same genitive, but the form is the so-called Attic second declension. See the nominative Apollōs in 1Co_3:5. 

Men (anthrōpoi). Just mere human creatures (anthrōpoi, generic term for mankind), in the flesh (sarkinoi), acting like the flesh (sarkikoi), not pneumatikoi, as if still psuchikoi. It was a home-thrust. Paul would not even defend his own partisans.


To me, honestly speaking, Far Eastern Bible College and Life Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore are carnal Christians, they are not spiritual, they are babe in Christ. They are acting in flesh, mere man.

But sad to say, both Far Eastern Bible College and Life Bible-Presbyterian Church are thinking the other way, they think they are very spiritual.......!!!!

FEBC and Life BPC are Church of Sardis

Revelation 3 “To the angel of the church in Sardis write: 

  These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2 Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God. 3 Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.

  4 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. 6 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Re 3:1–6.

Wake Up—The Message to the Church in Sardis (3:1–6)

“You Are Dead!” (1–3)

The two most adverse reports are sent to Sardis and to Laodicea. In this letter to Sardis, Jesus passes over any estimate of their “deeds” and their “reputation” to give the bottom line: “You are dead” (Revelation 3:1). Their only hope is to “Wake up!” How do they do this? They must complete the deeds they began at a former time, “Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; obey it, and repent” (Revelation 3:3). What will the consequences be if this is not done? Certainly it will be no less than His warning to the Ephesians, “I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place” (Revelation 2:5). Or to Pergamum, “Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth” (Revelation 2:16). But to Sardis, Jesus simply warns, “I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you” (Revelation 3:3).

A Few Still Live (4–6)

Even in a congregation judged as dead, a few individuals have managed to stay alive and refused to be entangled in either the sin of the world or the apathy of a dying congregation. They “have not soiled their clothes.” Jesus promises, “They will walk with me, dressed in white” (Revelation 3:4). He promises the one who overcomes, “I will never blot out his name from the book of life” (Revelation 3:5). By inference, Jesus is saying unless a person remains faithful, his name will be blotted out.

As Jesus introduces himself to this church, He is described as holding the sevenfold Spirit (the Holy Spirit) in one hand and the seven stars (angels or messengers) in the other. This is appropriate to the deepest need of the congregation. They need life, and the Spirit is associated with giving life: “The Spirit of God has made me; the breath of the Almighty gives me life” (Job 33:4).

Lewis Foster, Revelation: Unlocking the Scriptures for You, Standard Bible Studies (Cincinnati, OH: Standard, 1989), 54.

Trinity and Revelation 3 WORD BY WORD

The English-Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament New International Version (2011)

Revelation 3:1

Καὶ τῷ ἀγγέλῳ τῆς ἐν Σάρδεσιν ἐκκλησίας γράψον· Τάδε λέγει ὁ ἔχων τὰ ἑπτὰ πνεύματα τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοὺς ἑπτὰ ἀστέρας· Οἶδά σου τὰ ἔργα, ὅτι ὄνομα ἔχεις ὅτι ζῇς, καὶ νεκρὸς εἶ.  | NIV2011 NT RI

“To the angel of the church in Sardis write: These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. | NIV

Revelation 3:2

γίνου γρηγορῶν, καὶ στήρισον τὰ λοιπὰ ἃ ἔμελλον ἀποθανεῖν⸃, οὐ γὰρ εὕρηκά σου τὰ ἔργα πεπληρωμένα ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ μου·  | NIV2011 NT RI

Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God | NIV

Revelation 3:3

μνημόνευε οὖν πῶς εἴληφας καὶ ἤκουσας καὶ τήρει, καὶ μετανόησον· ἐὰν οὖν μὴ γρηγορήσῃς, ἥξω ὡς κλέπτης, καὶ οὐ μὴ γνῷς ποίαν ὥραν ἥξω ἐπὶ σέ·  | NIV2011 NT RI

Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you. | NIV

Revelation 3:4

ἀλλὰ ἔχεις ὀλίγα⸃ ὀνόματα ἐν Σάρδεσιν ἃ οὐκ ἐμόλυναν τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτῶν, καὶ περιπατήσουσιν μετʼ ἐμοῦ ἐν λευκοῖς, ὅτι ἄξιοί εἰσιν.  | NIV2011 NT RI

Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy | NIV

Revelation 3:5

ὁ νικῶν οὕτως περιβαλεῖται ἐν ἱματίοις λευκοῖς, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἐξαλείψω τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῆς βίβλου τῆς ζωῆς, καὶ ὁμολογήσω τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐνώπιον τοῦ πατρός μου καὶ ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀγγέλων αὐτοῦ.  | NIV2011 NT RI

The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels | NIV

Revelation 3:6

ὁ ἔχων οὖς ἀκουσάτω τί τὸ πνεῦμα λέγει ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις.  | NIV2011 NT RI

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. | NIV

Interpretation:

3 “To the angel of the church in Sardis write:

  These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2 Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God. 3 Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.

  4 Yet you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their clothes. They will walk with me, dressed in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels. 6 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Re 3:1–6.

Doctrine of Trinity in this chapter

1. Jesus Christ is holding the seven spirits of God. He is the Son of God. He mention the Holy Spirit here in verse 1

2. Jesus Christ said He is seeing his God in verse 2.

3. He said He is coming like a thief.

4. Jesus Christ acknowledged God the Father as "my Father." Christ taught the same in the gospels—that whoever would confess Him before men, in turn, He would confess before His Father and the angels (Mtt. Mat. 10:32; Luke Luke 12:8). What powerful incentive this is for our witness of Him in the face of skeptics and mockers! When standing before such men, let us consider ourselves to be standing before the very throne of the Father in our confession of the Son. “Coming immediately after the promise of not erasing the overcomer’s name from the book of life, this promise implies that on that future day of reckoning the judge will acknowledge the names written in the book as those who belong to Him.”

Even in the last book of the Bible, we learned that Our God is one, The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. Our God is eternal. Three Persons in One God. Amen.

Can Bible-Presbyterian Church unite as one? The answer is no! Big No.....

They like to quarrel, everyday quarrel, Tiam-Tiam Quarrel, TTQ......TTL

Heresy versus Schism: Which is Worse?

Dear All,

  

Heresy dies out. Schisms last for centuries. Heresy invites its own reversal by awakening a dynamic orthodoxy. Schism freezes doctrine, interferes with its healthy development. Heretics after all passionately want to improve the church's teaching. Their passion ignites a new passion in the church. Schism only provokes the passion of hatred, and its concomitant, war. In this discussion on the seriousness of heresy vis-a-vis schism, one of our company reminds us that the great schism between East and West is the first great fragmentation of the Church. Another listsib goes back to the Monophysite controversies of the fifth century, and their schisms. 

These prove the point I have been arguing: heresy is essentially a short-term phenomenon, schism is long-term. Heresy forces the church to articulate its message more accurately. 

For instance, the term homousios ("of one Being" in the Nicene Creed) is an accurate theoretical description of Jesus' relation to God, over against Arius' contention that "there was a time when He (Jesus Christ) was not." There was no schism because of the Arian controversy. even though it was one of the most serious and deadly heresies of all.

This later developed into the Monophysite controversy, as to whether Jesus had one ("mono") nature ("physis") or two, as Chalcedon insisted. After Chalcedon (451) there was a schism over the person of Christ. 

One of the consequences of that schism was the disillusionment with Christianity of a young man thirsting for God named Muhammed. 

More importantly, think how our divisions have given the lie to the Gospel we all preach.

Heresy dies out. Schisms last for centuries. Heresy invites its own reversal by awakening a dynamic orthodoxy. Schism freezes doctrine, interferes with its healthy development. Heretics after all passionately want to improve the church's teaching. Their passion ignites a new passion in the church. Schism only provokes the passion of hatred, and its concomitant, war. 

I reiterate, schism is always worse than heresy. For heresy is about doctrine - credo ut intelligam - while schism is about abandoning the commandment to love one another as Christ has loved us.

KJV only?

This past Sunday at church, a young lady in our congregation shared with me about someone she knows who believes that the King James Version(KJV) of the Bible is the only inspired translation. She went on to say that this acquaintance will actually go so far as to say that someone cannot be saved unless the KJV is used! It occurred to me that this young lady is most likely not the only person with a friend, relative, or co-worker who believes that the KJV is the only "inspired" version of the Bible.

Before commenting further, I want to be sure I'm clear on one thing; I like the KJV translation of the Bible. It's eloquence and poetic verse are second to none. Those who enjoy using the translation, whether because they were raised on it or due to the poetic nature of the verses, I believe it to be a good translation and see nothing wrong with it. However, I believe it to be one of the many good translations available today and certainly not the best.

My goal in this post is to 1) provide resources to understand the KJV only debate better 2) to provide questions for you to ask those who hold to "KJV Onlyism." I hope you find it helpful!

Here are some helpful resources:

A Complete History of the KJV Bible

The King James Bible

or check out this audio from Dr. Dan Wallace, New Testament Scholar

Background Information

If you are new to the KJV-only issue by Brian Tegart

If your not new to the KJV-only issue by Brian Tegart

If you are "KJV-only" by Brian Tegart

On the KJV Translators

The KJV Translators said THAT? by Brian Tegart

The Lofty and Worthy Endeavor or Goal of the KJV Translators by Rick Norris

Accuracy of the King James Version

Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible is the Best Translation Available Today by Daniel Wallace

Is Your Modern Translation Corrupt? Answering the Allegations of the KJV Only Advocates by James R. White

Errors in the King James Version? by William W. Combs

Issue Settled

Jesus is NOT KJV-Only! by Brian Tegart

Questions to ask KJV-Only Advocates

Ten Questions for "KJV Only" Supporters 

In summary, the KJV is a good translation, but that is all.

read more: http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/search/label/KJV%20Onlyism

One God in Three Persons

  אֶחָד is one in Hebrew......

Deuteronomy 6:4 (NIV)

⁴ Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one (אֶחָד)

Old Testament says God is one.

One God in one Person?

God is one, can be translated as "Joined One," please see:

Ezekiel 37:15–17 (NIV)

¹⁵ The word of the Lord came to me: ¹⁶ “Son of man, take a (אֶחָד) stick of wood and write on it, ‘Belonging to Judah and the Israelites associated with him.’ Then take another stick of wood, and write on it, ‘Belonging to Joseph (that is, to Ephraim) and all the Israelites associated with him.’ ¹⁷ Join them together into one (אֶחָד) stick so that they will become one (אֶחָד) in your hand.  

Two sticks joined into one, and became one!

God the Father joined with God the Son and joined with God the Holy Spirit, they are one God.

Our God is One God in Three Persons, Triune God.

Tri-unity,

Trinity.

Both Life Bible-Presbyterian Church and Far Eastern Bible College, they do not have unity. They split....!!!

Is the Bible Today What Was Originally Written?

By Andreas J. Köstenberger

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic (the Old Testament [OT]), and Greek (the New Testament [NT]). The Bibles we use today are translations from the original languages into English (or other languages). Jesus most likely taught in Aramaic (though he probably also knew Hebrew and Greek), so that the Greek NT itself represents a translation of Jesus' teaching from the Aramaic into Greek.

The question, "Is the Bible today what was originally written?" involves two important questions: (1) Are the available manuscripts (mss.) of the Bible accurate representations of the original mss. of the respective books of the Bible (the autographs of Scripture)? This is an issue of textual transmission. (2) Are the available translations faithful renderings of the Bible in the original languages? This is an issue of translation.

With regard to the first question, no original autographs exist of any biblical text; only copies are available. The word "manuscript" is used to denote anything written by hand, rather than copies produced from the printing press.  Textual evidence constitutes anything written on clay tablets, stone, bone, wood, various metals, potsherds (ostraca), but most notably papyrus and parchment (vellum). 

Most ancient books were compiled and then rolled into a scroll.  Since a papyrus roll rarely exceeded 35 feet in length, ancient authors divided a long literary work into several "books" (e.g., the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles consisted of a two-volume set composed by Luke).

Later, sometime during the first or second century A.D., the codex came into use.  The codex consisted of bound sheets of papyrus and constitutes the prototype for the modern book format.  Thus early Christians began to collect and collate individual books into what is now the canonical NT. The term "Bible" derives from the Greek word biblion (book); the earliest use of ta biblia (the books) in the sense of "Bible" is found in 2 Clement 2:14 (c. A.D. 150).

Even though the original autographs are lost, the extant ms. evidence allows a high degree of confidence in the text of the Bible. Both the Old and New Testaments are attested by a large number of mss. in a variety of forms spanning many centuries.

The primary witnesses to the OT come from the Masoretic texts (the Masoretes were Jewish scribes) including the Cairo Geniza (A.D. 895), the Leningrad Codex (A.D. 916), the Codex Babylonicus Petropalitanus (A.D. 1008), the Aleppo Codex (c. A.D. 900), the British Museum Codex (A.D. 950), and the Reuchlin Codex (A.D. 1105).  The Leningrad Codex remains the oldest complete ms. and serves as the main source for the Hebrew text.  However, since the earliest of these mss. date from the ninth century A.D., they are removed from the original autographs by a considerable period of time.

Other witnesses include the Talmud (Aramaic translations and commentaries), the Septuagint (LXX; the Greek translation of the OT), the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). The latter, discovered during the 1940s and 50s, provide scholars with witnesses to the OT text that can be dated between 250-100 B.C. Cave four (4Q), e.g., has yielded about 40,000 fragments of 400 different mss., 100 of which are biblical, representing every OT book except Esther.  Remarkably, a comparison of the DSS and the Masoretic text reveals a fairly small number of discrepancies.

Thus the ms. evidence for the OT firmly demonstrates that the original OT texts were carefully preserved and are accurately represented in our modern Bible.

The NT text remains the best attested document in the ancient world.  The witnesses to the NT fall into three broad categories: the Greek mss.; ancient translations (versions) into other languages; and quotations from the NT found in early ecclesiastical writers (the Church Fathers).  The Greek mss., over 6,000 in number, include papyrus fragments, uncials (written in all capitals without spaces and punctuation), and minuscules (small cursive-like script).

The papyri form the most significant group due to the fact that their early date implies that they are chronologically the closest to the original autographs. For example, both p52 (containing a few verses of John 18) and p46 (containing all of Paul's epistles except the Pastorals) are most likely dated within 30 years of the original writings.

The uncials follow the papyri in chronological importance. Codex Sinaiticus, an uncial written about A.D. 350, is the earliest extant copy of the entire NT.  Other uncials, such as the Codex Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, and Bezae, constitute significant witnesses as well.

The minuscules compose the largest group of Greek mss., but they are dated considerably later.

Finally, the versions and Church Fathers provide helpful early attestation that can aid scholars in reconstructing the most plausible original readings. The total tally of more than 6,000 Greek mss., more than 10,000 Latin Vulgate mss., and more than 9,300 early versions results in over 25,000 witnesses to the text of the NT.

This sheer multiplicity of mss. does not, however, result in absolute uniformity of the texts.  Thousands of variant readings (most of them minor) exist between the mss. While scribes exhibited great care in their effort to reproduce an exact copy,  they were not immune from human error. Scribal errors can take on the form of unintentional and intentional errors.  Unintentional errors are the cause of the majority of textual variants.  These typically include errors of the eyes (e.g., skipping words or losing one's place); hands (slips of the pen or writing notes in the margins); and ears (confusing similar sounding words or misunderstanding a word).  Intentional errors resulted when scribes attempted to correct a perceived error in the text or altered the text in the interest of doctrine and harmonization.  These errors often became standardized through subsequent copies made from the defective copy.

All Greek mss. exhibit traits that enable scholars to classifying them into text families (Alexandrian, Western, Byzantine) based on geographic origin, Greek style, and date. Through comparative analysis performed by the practitioners of a science called "textual criticism," scholars sift through all the mss. in order to reproduce the most plausible reading of the original autographs in each individual case.

Textual critics adjudicate between readings through exacting criteria such as dating, text type, attested readings (i.e., how many mss. have a certain reading), and possible reasons for variants (e.g., smoothing out a theologically difficult reading). In addition to examining the Greek mss. textual critics also consider all other relevant witnesses (i.e., versions and the Church Fathers).

Although textual criticism is a very complex and at times controversial science, it has provided us with at least two assured results. First, none of the variant readings (including omissions) affect the central message or theological content of the Scriptures. Second, it can confidently be asserted that the text of the Bible today is an accurate and faithful representation of the original autographs.

The second issue, namely that of translation, follows as a natural corollary once the question of the textualtransmission is settled. To assess the fidelity and accuracy of the Bible today compared to the original texts one must investigate the issues of translation theory and the history of the English Bible. The task of translating the Bible from its source languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) into a receptor language (English) involves a plethora of issues related to the nature of language and communication. Is word meaning found in some fixed form of inherent meaning, or is meaning determined by contextual usage? Is meaning located in the formal features of the original grammar, or in the function of words within the grammar? These are just a few of the questions pertaining to translation theory.

Some translators maintain that accurate translation requires a word-for-word approach of formal equivalence (KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV).  Others contend that construing a straightforward one-to-one correlation between two languages actually distorts meaning.  These translators employ a phrase-for-phrase approach  of dynamic or functional equivalence (NRSV, NIV, CEV, NLT, TNIV).  In light of linguistic, exegetical, and stylistic considerations translations produced in accord with dynamic or functional equivalency tend to reflect the original meaning more closely.  The goal of all translators, no matter what translation theory they employ, is the production of an English version that is an accurate rendering of the text written in such a way that the Bible retains its literary beauty, theological grandeur, and, most importantly, its message. 

The history of the English Bible satisfactorily demonstrates that the Bible of today does indeed faithfully represent the Scriptures in their original languages. For centuries the only Bible available to Western people was the Latin Vulgate prepared by Jerome, who was commissioned by Pope Damasus toward the end of the fourth century A.D.  The Vulgate served as the official version of the Bible throughout Medieval Europe and was restricted to the clergy, monastic orders, and scholars. 

A British priest and Oxford scholar, John Wycliffe (1330-1384), was the first to make the entire Bible accessible to the common English-speaking people.  His translation, however, was based on the Vulgate and not on the Hebrew and Greek.  William Tyndale published the first English NT based on the Greek text in 1526.  Two close associates of Tyndale, Miles Coverdale and John Rogers, finished his work by publishing their own respective translations of the entire Bible: the Coverdale Bible (1535) and Matthew's Bible (1537).  The Geneva Bible of 1560 provided a translation of the Bible entirely from the original languages.  This paved the way for King James I to issue a translation that would correct the partisan nature of the Geneva Bible.  Thus in 1611, the much-celebrated Authorized Version (AV or KJV), largely based on Tyndale's work, became the unrivaled English translation for 270 years. 

The twentieth century has given rise to a number of new translations.  The updating and production of new translations were necessitated by new ms. discoveries, changes in the English language, and the advancement of linguistics. Today, when someone opens any English Bible (NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, TNIV, HCSB), he or she may know that generations of faithful scholarship have managed to preserve and protect that Bible as it was originally given.

http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbbible.aspx?pageid=8589952765