We wrote about the Textus Receptus (TR) briefly last week in our second of 13 emphatic beliefs. This week we discuss the ending phrase, which says “we are not KJV-onlyists.” Aren’t we a KJV-only congregation? Yes we are, but that’s not what that phrase refers to.

The classic KJV-only position holds a double-inspiration view of the KJV Bible, asserting both the underlying TR as well as the English translation were immediately inspired by God. Authors Peter Ruckman and Gail Riplinger hold this view. In an attempt to identify perfect preservation, the translation was deemed inspired, not the transmission of the apographs (or, the copies). The Westminster Confession of Faith I.8 rightly identifies Scripture in the original languages as the inspired authentic source material for translations and dispute resolution, and their apographs are “kept pure in all ages”. God preserved His Word in the TR by freezing it in two dead languages: OT Hebrew and NT Koine Greek. Because those languages are not spoken any more, the meanings don’t change, and we have a sure foundation. Translation work continues because the target language changes, and not all nations yet have God’s Word in their native tongue.

More importantly, God says this about His Word: The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it. There will be a single baseline (the word), and it would be published. Paul told Timothy thou hast known the holy Scriptures (grammata; lit. letters) and all Scripture (grapha, meaning the written copies) is given by inspiration of God. Timothy did not possess the originals, but he had copies (not ideas or concepts) which, down to the letter, were inspired. Thus, the copies that made Timothy wise unto salvation were the preserved equivalent to inspiration. This allows us to check out the translator from a pure base.