The Facts and the Reality
1) Out of the 5,000 plus mss, there are only two sources in the NT Greek Texts: The Textus Receptus (or TR that underlies the KJV), and the Westcott and Hort Texts that underlies the modern versions. The Bible teaches us that VPP is taught in Scriptures. VPP teaches that all the inspired words of God are perfectly preserved by God Himself (last week’s elder’s page). These perfectly preserved texts are identified as the Masoretic Text (MT) for the Old Testament and Textus Receptus (TR) for the New Testament which underlies the KJV. These are also called the Traditional texts that have been kept pure throughout the ages and were in continuous circulation for 1,500 years. If one were to reject these texts as the God preserved words, the only other option is the Westcott and Hort Minority Texts.
2) Every translation is based upon a particular Hebrew and Greek texts determined by the translators.
3) VPP is not about preserving a translation but all the inspired words of God in the original languages of Hebrew and Greek.
4) Before there was any translation there was the Word of God only, in Hebrew and Greek.
5) No two translations are exactly the same. When we compare the NT of the CUV and the KJV, there are differences such as missing verses (fewer verses in CUV than the KJV) and different phrases in verses. We cannot deny these differences. What do we do with these differences?
The Two Responses to # 5:
1) No Solution –
a) Ignore the differences -- To reject VPP would be like the proverbial ostrich - pretend that all is well and ignore the differences. This solution is to opt to believe that the differences do not exist! But alas! It is not facing reality.
b) “I don’t know” – There are those who reject the VPP and simply raise their hands in surrender and cry, “I don’t know; all translations have mistakes because the inspired words are lost”; or “we do not know where they are”. To take this view, they either do not read the Word of God at all since they do not know where God’s inspired words are, or if they do read the Word of God then they choose to deceive themselves and others since they actually know!
c) “Somewhere out there but don’t know where” – This group of anti-VPP proponents cry, “The Word of God is ‘somewhere out there in the 5,000 plus manuscripts but we don’t know where’.” Like the proponents of “I don’t know”, they cannot read the Word of God since they do not know where it is; if they do read then they are also deceiving themselves and others by their double talk.
Comment— The contradiction in the above three views is that whenever the Word of God is read, the translation that is used has to be based upon either the Minority Texts of Westcott and Hort Texts or Textus Receptus (Traditional Texts). Whenever a believer reads the Bible, the translation he uses is his choice of the original text. The only way to be consistent to their “I don’t know” view is to not read any Bible at all! By not reading the Bible, he will not be forced to choose. The moment he picks up the Bible to read in any translation, he has to ask himself, where are the inspired words of God? He has to first find all the inspired words of God before he starts reading! But the rejection of VPP automatically forfeits them of this ability to choose.
2) The Solution –
a) Compare with the Hebrew and Greek texts -- If you read Hebrew and Greek then compare the CUV with the Masoretic Texts (MT) for the OT and the Textus Receptus (TR) for the NT just as we compare the KJV with the MT and TR;
b) Compare with the most accurate and faithful translation in another language -- But if you do not read Hebrew and Greek and you read English and another language, then compare your translation with the KJV which is the next best way to know the whole truth. The reason is that the KJV is the most faithful and most accurate translation of the Bible in the English language. So if the Christian reads English and Chinese (the CUV), then he can compare the CUV against the KJV. If he does not read English, then he should compare his translation with the most faithful and accurate translation in another language that he knows. Rev James Sun did his thesis on the differences between the CUV and KJV (in the NT only) and a booklet has been published (by FEBC) in which he has highlighted these differences and has translated these differences into Mandarin. This is a helpful companion to the CUV until a more accurate Mandarin translation is made available.
Is using the KJV as the basis an unjust comparison? -- Some might see this as an unjust comparison or reduce this to a racial problem between English speaking Christians and Chinese speaking Christians. This is not the case at all. It is about the truth and accuracy of Scriptures.
God called the apostle Paul to go west when he wanted to go east in Acts 16:7-9 . Because of this turnaround, the gospel headed west into present day Europe. Through this providential turnaround, church history began in Europe and then it came east much later. When the gospel went to China and before the first Chinese translation was completed (Marshman’s Version in 1822), the KJV had already been in existence for over 200 years. This means that the first Chinese convert who believed in Christ did not have a Chinese Bible to read, unless he could read English (the KJV) or Hebrew and Greek (the Masoretic Texts for the OT and the Traditional Text or Textus Receptus for the NT) which was in existence through all the ages.
He had to wait for the first translation. It came out in portions before the entire Bible was translated into Chinese. This is true of all translations including the English language. The first English convert did not have any Bible to read in his language until John Wycliffe translated the Bible into English in 1382 AD, the first European translation in over 1,000 years. But it was translated from the Latin Vulgate because Wycliffe could not read Hebrew and Greek. All the errors in the Latin Vulgate were also found in that first English translation. But as an English speaking Christian who needed to read the Bible, he had no choice but to read that translation. It was either that or don’t read the Bible at all! There was not even an alternative translation to compare with because it was against the law of Rome to translate the Bible unless the Christian reads Hebrew and Greek. The Roman Church hated Wycliffe for what he did.
The English speaking Christian should not reject the Bible in the original languages (VPP) because he finds that Wycliffe’s translation is different from the Bible in the original languages. This is what some of the Chinese speaking Christians are doing when they find that the CUV is different from the MT and TR. They reject the doctrine of VPP! By this very rejection they cut the foundation for the CUV and all translations! There is no basis for evaluating which translation is the best and most accurate and faithful!
The next English translation was by William Tyndale. He translated the first English Bible from the original languages. He managed to complete the NT (1526) and portions of the OT before he was captured and burnt at the stake. He was martyred for translating the Bible into the English language. The Christian of that time could read Tyndale’s English translation but it was incomplete. Does that mean he should reject the rest of the OT which Tyndale has not translated? Of course not! The best method is to use Tyndale’s and Wycliffe’s translations together with priority given to Tyndale’s because this was translated using the Traditional Texts.
In 1611 the KJV was completed. For the first time in the History of the Church, a king authorized the translation of the Bible into English to unite a nation. The best minds and people with the best qualifications and highest regard for the Word of God and who realized that the faith of an entire nation depended on their translation were appointed to do this God-appointed task. This was done by God’s sovereign will before the contamination that is textual criticism and wicked men like Westcott and Hort came into the scene to confuse and undermine our trust in God’s perfect Word. They did not do it for money but for God’s glory!
Conclusion – The doctrine of VPP is a doctrine for all believers like the doctrine of VPI. It is not a translation issue but a source issue. God has chosen Hebrew and Greek as His languages for the inspiration of His perfect words. For example if CPBPC is a Greek speaking church, then we would not be talking about KJV but the TR versus Westcott and Hort from the Greek NT directly. But CPBPC is an English and Mandarin speaking church and therefore to defend the Hebrew and Greek texts, we need to use English and Mandarin. It is easy for the attackers of God’s Truth to misinterpret our position and conclude that we are saying “that the KJV is inspired” since our papers and defense are written in English. This is a gross misconception.
The doctrine of VPP defends the doctrine of inspiration (VPI). The KJV and CUV depend on VPP for identification. We may not read Hebrew and Greek but we believe in inspiration, do we not? We must also defend VPP because like VPI, it is about all the perfect words of God in Hebrew and Greek that God had chosen, to reveal to sinners who He is and what He has done! Psalm 11:3 affirms, “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?”