PUBLICATIONS
THE BURNING BUSH
Volume 14
Number 2, July 2008
Kicking
against the Pricks: The SCCC Contradicts the ICCC on VPP
Jeffrey Khoo
The Singapore Council of Christian
Churches (SCCC), which is the national affiliate in Singapore of the
International Council of Christian Churches (ICCC), in its Reformation
Rally of 2007 passed another statement1
against the Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) of the Holy Scriptures.
This latest statement is clearly not in line with the ICCC resolutions
on the Bible made in Amsterdam 1998 and Jerusalem 2000 which the SCCC
claims to reaffirm. In the Far Eastern Beacon of Easter 2008, the
SCCC quoted the ICCC resolution that "The King James Version in English
has been faithfully translated from these God-preserved manuscripts—the
Masoretic Text preserving the Old Testament and the Textus Receptus
preserving the New Testament."2
This is what VPP affirms—the Hebrew/Aramaic words of the Masoretic Text,
and the Greek words of the Textus Receptus are the very inspired and
preserved words of God, and the Authorised or King James Version (AV/KJV)
is a faithful translation of those divinely inspired and preserved
original language words.
It is unfortunate that in the same
paper, the SCCC misrepresents VPP by putting the cart before the horse
claiming that VPP is KJV3
when VPP is the special providential preservation of the divinely
inspired words of the Holy Scriptures in the original languages (i.e.,
Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek words, and not English words or any other
foreign language words in Bible translations or versions). It must be
underscored that VPP recognises and requires the translation of true and
faithful versions of the Bible into other languages that are based upon
the God-preserved manuscripts or verbally and plenarily preserved texts,
namely, the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus from
which the KJV has been faithfully translated as affirmed by the ICCC.4
It ought to be made known that the
Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC) has been championing the ICCC
resolution on the preservation of Scripture passed at its 16th
World Congress in Jerusalem in the year 2000. The ICCC statement #11
affirmed, "Believing the OT has been preserved in the Masoretic text and
the NT in the Textus Receptus, combined they gave us the complete Word
of God. The King James Version in English has been faithfully translated
from these God-preserved manuscripts."5
In the same issue of the Far
Eastern Beacon (Easter 2008), the SCCC also republished a 2005
letter by the Independent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions (IBPFM)
denouncing the doctrine and promotion of VPP which clearly contradicts
what the SCCC has reaffirmed in the very same paper to be the ICCC
position on Biblical preservation, the KJV and its underlying original
language texts. The SCCC paper in the Far Eastern Beacon is
inherently inconsistent and contradictory. Wittingly or unwittingly, the
SCCC anti-VPPists have undermined the testimony of the ICCC and their
own credibility by their very own words and actions.
It is worth noting that Dr Lynn Gray
Gordon, former General Secretary of the IBPFM, in his commentary on the
Westminster Confession of Faith, states unequivocally that "The Holy
Scriptures have been miraculously preserved down through the
ages."6
This is nothing less than the VPP of the Holy Scriptures by special or
extraordinary, supernatural or miraculous providence ("by His singular
care and providence") as affirmed in the Westminster Confession of Faith
(Chapter 1, Section 8). But the SCCC says that the continuing
preservation of the one Holy Scripture, the Bible, is merely "general
[i.e. not special, non-miraculous, without direct, extraordinary
divine intervention], but not plenary [i.e. not full, complete,
100% to the jot and tittle]."7
Is this Biblically correct, theologically sensible, and logically
tenable? Is this the Reformed understanding of the Holy Scriptures and
of Sola Scriptura?
How we thank God for the Biblical
doctrine of the verbal and plenary preservation and the present
infallibility and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures in the original
languages (Ps 12:6-7, Matt 5:18, 24:35, John 10:35, 2 Tim 3:16-17)!
Insofar as the KJV is concerned, Dr Gordon rightly disclaimed the KJV as
an "inspired version" but nonetheless upheld the KJV to be "free from
error in thought, fact and doctrine."8
VPP proponents say Amen to this.
The SCCC statement illustrates the
fallacy of human logic and the fallibility of the words of men. Man’s
writings are full of contradictions, discrepancies and errors, but God’s
words are perfect, infallible, and inerrant, without any contradiction,
discrepancy, or mistake to the last letter and syllable. It proves all
the more that the words of God are forever infallible and inerrant, and
always trustworthy, our sole and supreme authority of faith and
practice. The logic of faith is the key to a consistent Bibliology. The
logic of unbelief, on the other hand, produces illogical thinking and
ungodly deeds. Dr Gordon rightly observed, "Sin is an irrational
thing. It makes a man act not only wickedly, but foolishly."9
It baffles the mind to see the SCCC holding a Reformation Rally only to
undermine the Reformation Bible, the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek
Textus Receptus on which the KJV is based by denying and denouncing VPP.
Even the Rev K C Quek—former General Secretary of the ICCC—himself
testified that he does not "see ‘main contradictions’ between the clause
4.2.1 in the existing Constitution of our B-P Churches and the VPP
theory."10
Indeed, we see no contradiction whatsoever.
May the SCCC and its member churches
retract all their statements against VPP before they do further damage
to the testimony and credibility of the ICCC and the legacy of Dr Carl
McIntire who believed without question that Psalm 12:6, 7 proves the
perfect preservation of the words of God.11
It is indeed truthful that VPP is a
blessed doctrine which preserves godly paths to the glory of God alone.
How true our Saviour’s words, "It is hard for thee to kick against the
pricks" (Acts 9:5)!
Notes
1
The SCCC had issued an earlier statement, "Inspiration and Translations
of the Holy Scriptures," a resolution passed in its 49th AGM
on October 29, 2005, and published in the November-December 2005 issue
of the Far Eastern Beacon. See also Jeffrey Khoo, "Inspiration,
Preservation, and Translations," The Burning Bush 13 (2007):
12-13.
2
"Re-affirming SCCC Stand on the Word of God," "IBPFM Resolution on Bible
Inspiration," Far Eastern Beacon 39:1 (Easter 2008): 4.
3
Ibid, 5.
4
Ibid, 4.
5
"ICCC 16th World Congress Statements," Far Eastern Beacon
(Christmas 2000): 13.
6
Lynn Gray Gordon,
The World’s Greatest
Truths (Singapore:
Far Eastern Bible College Press, 1999), 25.
7
"Re-affirming SCCC Stand on the Word of God," 5. Emphasis in the
original, but explanations in parenthesis are mine.
8
Gordon, 26.
9
Ibid, 174.
10
"A Founding Leader of the B-P Movement in Singapore Replies to a Query
on the Church Constitution" (http:// www.lifebpc.com/ourstand/querycc.htm
accessed on June 19, 2008). The B-P Constitution 4.2.1 reads, "We
believe in the divine, verbal and plenary inspiration of the Scriptures
in the original languages, their consequent inerrancy and infallibility,
and as the Word of God, the Supreme and final authority in faith and
life."
11
Hear his sermon entitled — "Help, LORD!" (Psalm 12) — preached on
January 11, 1992, accessible from
www.sermonaudio.com.
Dr Jeffrey Khoo is academic dean of the Far Eastern
Bible College, and an advisory council member of the Dean Burgon
Society.
Top
/ Back
|