Standard Bearers
Isaiah 59:19
"So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun.
When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him."

How We Know the Bible is True

It depends on who we choose to believe!

Whether the witness of God, the Saints and their Westminster Confession (Mother of all Confessions) which all say our copy of the Word of God, the Bible is 100% pure.

Or the opposing witness of the Chicago Statement and the naturalistic Textual Critic who says the copy of the Word of God, the Bible is almost pure.

You decide. God says we can know for sure:

John 16:13-14
"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you."

Hymn ~ Come, Gracious Spirit 

1 John 2:27
"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

Thank you for taking time to visit our site. Read this page for a quick understanding of how you can know the Bible is 100% true. Or for an even quicker overview read by paper, Retaking the Hill of Biblical Inerrancy: The Next Reformation - The Westminster Confession Rejection of the Chicago Statement.

If you find this information helpful or have questions or suggestions please let me know and I will be glad to respond.

Louis M. Kole
louis.kole@standardbearers.net


MISSION

Our mission is to give witness that the Word of God is 100% pure, inerrant in the copy (Bible) as in the original, the autograph.


THESIS

Our thesis is the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy has been redefined from meaning the copy of the Word of God is 100% pure to meaning the Bible is almost pure.


CHALLENGE

If asked to identify the Word of God given 100% pure in the original by divine inspiration and kept 100% pure in the copy by divine preservation, to which Bible would we point?


TRUTH

The Westminster Confession and saints identified their copy of the Word of God in the New Testament as the Textus Receptus Greek text and the Old Testament as the Masoretic Hebrew text, this was their Bible they held to be 100% pure.


ERROR

Did you know in 1881 the Textus Receptus New Testament, the historical text of the saints was replaced with a different New Testament text, referred to as the Westcott-Hort / United Bible Society text (W-H/UBS) and is the basis of modern translations: NIV, NAS, EVS?


QUESTION

Whose witness are we to believe, the contemporary witness of the Protestant leaders who embrace the Westcott-Hort / UBS 'Bible' expressed in the Chicago Statement which says the copy of the Word of God is almost pure, or the Word of God and the historical witness of Protestant saints who embraced the Textus Receptus and believed the Word of God is 100% pure in its copy, our Bible?


ANSWER

The answer is found in whether we choose to believe the Word of God or the word of man. The issue of inerrancy is identical to the debate on evolution: neither can be decided by the rational of man, but only by faith in the revealed Word of God.


INERRANCY

The authenticity and authority of the Bible rests upon two pillars: (1) Divine Inspiration and (2) Divine Preservation, which establishes the Word of God is 100% pure, in the copy as in the original. These two fundamental truths are clearly revealed in the scriptures and are the historical witness of the saints.


INSPIRATION

HOW WE KNOW THE ORIGINAL OF SCRIPTURE  IS 100% PURE, INERRANT, WITHOUT ERROR

The original of the Word of God was received 100% pure by the saints from God by divine inspiration. The doctrine of divine inspiration is commonly understood.  It's quoted from these proof texts (brackets].

"All scripture [graphé] is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."  
2 Timothy 3:16

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
2 Peter 1:20-21


WITNESS

SAINTS BELIEVED SCRIPTURE TAUGHT THE ORIGINAL IS 100% PURE WORD OF GOD, NOT OF MAN

JOHANNES QUENSTEDT

The divine inspiration of scripture is both the witness of the Word of God and the saints. Johannes Quenstedt (1617-1688) was among the foremost leaders and theologians of the post-Reformation Lutheran church, and he offers us insight into the Reformers understanding on the doctrine of divine inspiration:

“The Holy Spirit not only inspired in the prophets and apostles the content and the sense contained in Scripture, or the meaning of the words, so that they might of their own pleasure clothe and furnish these thoughts with their own style and their own words; but the Holy Spirit actually supplied, inspired, and dictated the very words and each and every term individually”
(Cited from Dr. Sam Storms, ‘Quenstedt, Theologia Didactico-Polemica Sive Systema Theologicum’, P.I, C.4, S.2, q.4

However, the doctrine of divine inspiration only addresses the original, not the copy of scripture, our Bible. Therefore, how do we know the copy is as pure as the original? We know by the doctrine of divine preservation.


PRESERVATION

HOW WE KNOW THE COPY OF SCRIPTURE  IS 100% PURE, INERRANT, WITHOUT ERROR

The copy of the Word of God was transmitted 100% identical as the original through the saints from generation to generation, "from faith to faith", by divine preservation (providential preservation). The doctrine is not commonly understood. It's quoted in these proof texts.

(v6)  "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
(v7)  Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."  
Psalms 12:6-7


In Psalms 12, King David is encouraging God's people to take hope in God's promise of their deliverance from the wicked: (v5) "I will set [him] in safety [from him that] puffeth at him."  

God is promising us two things in Psalms 12. First, in verse six, God promises the 100% preservation of the purity of His Word, (6) "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times."  Secondly, in verse seven, He promises the 100% preservation of the safety of His people and Word, (7) "Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever." 

God intentionally intertwines these two truths: the preservation of His Word and people for us to understand that He preserves His saints like He preserves His Word- 100% sure, "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in they name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost..."  (John 17:12).

He preserves His Word like He preserves His saints-100% sure, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled"  (Matthew 5:18).  God does not lose anything, either His people or His Word. God is declaring through King David what He has doing about since creation and will continue to do forever - preserving His people and His Word.

God's promise of the preservation of His people is secured by His Word, and both are secured by His character, meaning He cannot lie, "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" Numbers 23:19

The Word and character of God are synonymous, they're opposite sides of the same coin. If one is denigrated, the whole is denigrated. If God's Word is not good, neither is His character, nor the promises to His people.  But we know God is good and so is His Word, therefore His promises are sure to us, "...There is none good but one, that is, God:"  (
Matthew 19:17). 

Psalms 12 illustrates the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy which affirms the 100% pure preservation of the copy (our Bible) of the Word of God. When King David wrote this Psalm he was reading from the copy of the Word of God and not the original, since there were no originals in his day except those being penned in the Psalms. Yet he said, "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."  This teaches us that by the doctrine of divine preservation, the copy is identical to the original, making it equally inspired, inerrant and authoritative- forever.

We have the 100% pure Word of God in the copy (our Bible) as King David had in his day and as the first century saints received in the original by divine inspiration.  We believe as they, the Bible is 100% pure because God says it is; God says it, that settles it whether I believe it or not. This is a point of faith, not a rationalistic approach taken by the textual critic.  Let me make the truth of Psalms 12 abundantly clear, with a question, for those who are content believing their copy of the Word of God is 99% pure; would you be equally content knowing your salvation is 99% sure as well? 

You don't have to, and this is the truth of Psalms 12, the salvation of His people is as sure as His Word and His Word is as sure as our salvation, both bear witness to the other, "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand"  (
John 10:29).  All the promises of God about the surety of His people are applicable to His Word, and all His promises about the surety of His Word are applicable to His people, otherwise the character of God would be brought into question. Therefore, we do not have to wait for the 100% pure Word of God to be found we already possess it; this is the historical witness of the saints.


WITNESS

SAINTS BELIEVED SCRIPTURE TAUGHT THE COPY IS 100% PURE WORD OF GOD, NOT OF MAN

JOHANNES QUENSTEDT


The divine preservation of scripture is both the witness of the Word of God and the saints. Again, Johannes Quenstedt provides us the Reformer’s view: that the copy of the Word of God was identical to the original as received by the Apostles (emphasis & brackets mine):

“We believe, as is our duty, that the providential care of God has always watched over the
original and primitive texts [copy] of the canonical Scriptures in such a way that we can be certain that the sacred codices which we now have in our hands [copy] are those which existed at the time of Jerome and Augustine, nay at the time of Christ Himself
and His Apostles [i.e. meaning their ‘copy’ is identical to the ‘originals’].”
(Cited in Robert Preus, The Inspiration of Scripture: ‘A Study in the Theology of the Seventeenth-Century Lutheran Dogmaticians’, London: Oliver & Boyd, 1955, 139)

FRANCIS TURRETIN


Francis Turretin (1623-1687) was a contemporary of Quenstedt and a Pastor, theologian and leader of the Church (Presbyterian) and Academy of Geneva. He affirms the Reformation witness of Quenstedt, that they believed their copy was identical to the original as received by the Apostles (emphasis & brackets mine):

“By
original texts, we do not mean the autographs [original] written by the hand of Moses, of the prophets and the apostles, which certainly do not now exist. We mean their apographs [copy of original] which are so called because they set forth to us the word of God in the very words of those who wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”
(English translation from Institutes of Elenctic Theology by Francis Turretin, trans. George Musgrave Giger, ed. James T. Dennison, vol 1, Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1992, pp. 71-72)


SAINTS HELD NEW TESTAMENT TEXT IS THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS AND IDENTICAL TO THE ORIGINAL

KURT ALAND

Kurt Aland (1915-1994) was among the most renowned Biblical textual critics of the 20th century. He did not necessarily share the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy articulated herein, that the copy of the Word of God, our Bible, was preserved 100% pure. However he does lend his testimony to the historical witness of the saints as to the text they believed to be the Word of God, divinely preserved 100% pure in its copy. He said it was the Textus Receptus (emphasis mine):

"It is undisputed that from the 16th to the 18th century orthodoxy's doctrine of verbal inspiration assumed ... [the]
Textus Receptus. It was the only Greek text they knew, and they regarded it as the 'original text'."
(The Text Of The Church? Trinity Journal 8, Fall 1987: p. 131)


SAINTS NEW TESTAMENT WAS OVERTHROWN IN 1881 BY WESCOTT-HORT REVISED 'BIBLE' 

ERNEST COLWELL

Ernest Colwell (1901-1974) was president (1945-1951) of the
University of Chicago, first president of the Claremont Graduate University School of Theology and founder of its Institute of Antiquity and Christianity. He was considered the foremost naturalistic textual critic and “dean” of New Testament textual criticism in North America. He affirms Aland's witness and goes on to confirm the damage the textual critics inflicted upon the faith in the authenticity and authority of the copy of the Word of God as preserved in the Textus Receptus, in their ceaseless denigration of it by Westcott and Hort (W-H) which continues today (emphasis mine):

“The dead hand of Fenton John Anthony Hort lies heavy upon us. In the early years of this century 
Kirsopp Lake described Hort’s work as a failure, though a glorious one. But Hort did not fail to reach his major goal. He dethroned the Textus Receptus. ... Hort’s success in this task and the cogency of his tightly reasoned theory shaped- and still shapes- the thinking of those who approach the textual criticism of the NT through the English language.”
('Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text,' The Bible in Modern Scholarship, ed. J.P. Hyatt, New York: Abingdon Press, 1965, p. 370)


SAINTS NEW TESTAMENT IS NOT THE NEW TESTAMENT OF UNITED BIBLE SOCIETY 
NIVNAS & EVS

BRUCE METZGER 

Bruce Metzger (1914-2007) was probably one of the most influential textual critics of our day. He is one of the editors of the United Bible Societies (UBS) Greek New Testament and the author of many widely used books on textual criticism. He affirms Colwell's opinion that the legacy of Westcott and Hort lives on in the New Testament Greek text of the UBS, which is almost identical to the Westcott and Hort text of 1881:

“The International committee that produced the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, not only adopted the Westcott and Hort edition as its basic text, but followed their methodology in giving attention to both external and internal considerations.”
(cited by James Brooks, ‘Bible Interpreters of the 20th Century’, p. 264; from ‘The Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament--Yesterday and Today’, 1981)

The New Testament Greek text of Westcott-Hort / UBS forms the textual basis for modern translations including the
NIVNAS and EVS, Yet, this UBS text has significant departures from the received text, the Textus Receptus, on matters of doctrinal significance. For instance, compare: Col 1:14;= "through his blood";  1Tim 3:16= "God was manifested in the flesh"; Heb 1:3= "by himself purged our sins" ).

KURT ALAND

"Thus the text, built up on the work of the 19th century [1881 W-H], has remained as a whole unchanged, particularly since the research of recent years has not yet led to the establishment of a generally acknowledged N.T. text [autograph, original text of the Word of God, our Bible]".
(emphasis and brackets mine; Introduction to the 24th edition of Nestle's Greek New Testament, by Erwin Nestle and Kurt Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 24th edition, 1960, p.62)

What do we think a seminary student would feel if he was told by his Professor, "We have not yet established a New Testament text, i.e. Bible"? Do we think it would affect the young minister's faith in the authenticity and authority of the Word of God he has been called to preach? Would it provide us a comfortable rationale to shun teaching doctrines which are not politically correct, because they may represent a cultural bias of a scribe? Could the redefinition of the family be laid at the feet of our silent pulpits for fear of what man will do if we preach 'all the word of God'

Are we being faithful to our calling as Apostle Paul when he faced similar pressures. He believed he possessed the Word of God and not man, therefore could boldly say; "I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel [word] of God"  (
Acts 20:27 emphasis and brackets mine). When we denigrate the authenticity of the Word of God we also denigrate the faith of the saints in its authority; "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God"  (Romans 10:17).


SAINTS HELD THE NEW TESTAMENT IS 100% PURE AND HAS NO NEED OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM

ERNEST COLWELL

We have established the Biblical
and historical doctrine of inerrancy held that the Word of God was 100% pure in its copy, our Bible. Colwell attests to the soundness of this theological, faith-based view, for those who hold to the Bible as a "Book dictated in miraculous fashion by God", meaning divinely inspired (by implication divinely preserved as well). He says this is the only logical position consistent with those who believe their Bible is a 100% pure copy of the Word of God, and there would be no need of textual criticism (brackets and emphasis mine):

“It is often assumed by the ignorant and uniformed – even on a university camp – the textual criticism of the New Testament is supported by a superstitious faith in the Bible as a book dictated in miraculous fashion by God. That is not true. Textual criticism has never existed for those whose New Testament is one of miracle, mystery and authority [divine inspiration and preservation]. A New Testament created under those auspices would have been handed down under
them and would have no need for textual criticism.”
(Colwell, What is the best New Testament? op. cit., p.8.)

This is exactly my thesis, spoken better than I can in the words of the dean of New Testament criticism. We already have the 100% pure Word of God in its copy, our Bible. So why fund all these eclectic texts which continue to denigrate the Word and character of God and the faith of the saints?


SAINTS BELIEF IN THE DOCTRINES OF DIVINE INSPIRATION AND 
PRESERVATION IS LOGICAL

DANIEL WALLACE

Daniel Wallace is Professor of New Testament Studies at
Dallas Theological Seminary, Executive Director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, and author of Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. He works extensively in textual criticism and is the senior New Testament editor of the NET Bible and coeditor of the NET-Nestle Greek-English diglot. Like Colwell, he affirms the logic of holding to the doctrines of divine inspiration and divine preservation for those with a theological, faith-based view that believe the Word of God is 100% pure in its copy, our Bible. While he does not subscribe to this view, he like Colwell, states my thesis better than I can when he says (emphasis& brackets mine):

“I wish to address an argument that has been used by TR/MT [Textus Receptus/ Majority text] advocates—an argument which is especially persuasive among laymen. The argument is unashamedly
theological [faith-based] in nature
: inspiration and preservation are intrinsically linked to one another and both are intrinsically linked to the TR/MT [majority text].

That is to say, the doctrine of verbal-plenary inspiration necessitates the doctrine of providential preservation of the text, and the doctrine of
providential preservation necessarily implies that the majority text (or the TR) [Textus Receptus]
is the faithful replica of the autographs.

If inspiration and preservation can legitimately be linked to the text of the New Testament in this way, then
the (new) KJV NT is the most accurate translation and those who engage in an expository ministry should use this text alone and encourage their audiences to do the same
."
(
'Inspiration, Preservation and New Testament Textual Criticism', Originally published in Grace Theological Journal 12 (1992) 21-51; also published in New Testament Essays in Honor of Homer A. Kent, Jr. (ed. Gary T. Meadors; Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 1991): 69-102.)

Again, the above is exactly the thesis of this site, which holds that which the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy necessitates: that the original text be received 100% pure by divine inspiration, and its copy,  kept 100% pure by divine preservation. This is the historical witness of the saints to the text of the Textus Receptus, which has been faithfully translated into English in the
King James Bible of 1611.

Divine inspiration and divine preservation are opposite sides of the same coin, therefore they are intrinsically linked. You can no more have one without the other than you can have a one-sided coin, there’s no such thing- it’s inconceivable. Nor can you denigrate one without denigrating the other; they are one in the same. When you protect one you protect the other, when you cherish one you cherish the other. It's akin to trying to separate the Word of God from the character of God- it's impossible because they're one in the same; "For thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." 
Psalms 138:2


THE TEXT OF UNITED BIBLE SOCIETY 'BIBLE' IS CORRUPTED AND NOT TRUSTWORTHY

ZANE HODGES

Zane Hodges (1932-2008) was a pastor, seminary professor, Bible scholar and taught New Testament Greek and Exegesis (1960–1987) at Dallas Theological Seminary and was also chairman of the New Testament Department. He affirms the absence of the justification for abandoning the text which was the historical witness of the saints, the Textus Receptus, for those which lacks its credibility and are represented in the critical texts we hold today as the inerrant Word of God (emphasis mine):

“Modern textual criticism is psychologically ‘addicted’ to Westcott and Hort. Westcott and Hort, in turn, were rationalists in their approach to the textual problem in the New Testament and employed techniques within which rationalism and every other kind of bias are free to operate. The result of it all is a methodological quagmire where objective controls on the conclusions of critics are nearly nonexistent.
It goes without saying that no Bible-believing Christian who is willing to extend the implications of his faith to textual matters can have the slightest grounds for confidence in contemporary critical texts.”
('Rationalism and Contemporary New Testament Textual Criticism,' Bibliotheca Sacra, January 1971, p. 35)

Have we 'lost' the word of God to the eclectic texts of the textual critic like it was once 'lost' in the Latin of Roman Catholicism before the Reformation? When it was 'handed down unto us' with the sure witness of the saints, sealed in their blood, "How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished!" 
2 Sam 1:27


SAINTS BIBLE IS GRADUALLY BEING ABANDONED AND MOVING TOWARD A 
'LIVING TEXT'

DAVID PARKER 

David Parker is the Edward Cadbury Professor of Theology and Director of the Centre for the Editing of Texts in Religion at University of Birmingham (UK). In case you doubt the validity of Hodge's lack of confidence in rationalistic textual criticism, and how far the denigration of the Word of God can descend, perhaps these following assertions by Parker will convince you:
 
"The text is changing. Every time that I make an edition of the Greek New Testament, or anybody does, we change the wording. We are maybe trying to get back to the oldest possible form but, paradoxically, we are creating a new one.

Every translation is different, every reading is different, and although there’s been a tradition in parts of Protestant Christianity to say there is a definitive single form of the text, the fact is you can never find it. There is never ever a final form of the text." 
(BBC Radio 4 program, "The Oldest Bible:
David C. Parker, Wilikpedia)

“The free text indicates that to at least some early Christians, it was more important to hand on the spirit of Jesus' teaching than to remember the letter.... The material about Jesus was preserved in an interpretive rather than an exact fashion."
(Scripture is Tradition, Theology 1994, p.15)

“The gospels are not archives of traditions but living texts,”…and, therefore, “the concept of a Gospel that is fixed in shape, authoritative, and final as a piece of literature has to be abandoned.”…
(The Living Text of the Gospels, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997; p.119, 93)

The extent of Dr. Parker's views may not be shared by all in the Emergent Church, but it provides a good barometer where it's trending. Perhaps you are beginning to realize where this madness will lead. The only antidote for the above is the Word of God and returning to the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy, that embraces a 100% pure Word of God in its copy; our Bible.

Now, let's look at one more excellent testimony from an authority on this truth, that the Word of God is 100% pure in its copy, our Bible.


SCRIPTURE AFFIRMS WORD OF GOD IS 100% PURE IN ITS COPY, THE BIBLE OF THE SAINTS

FLOYD JONES

Dr. Jones, Th.D., PH.D., in his book, Which Version is the Bible?, affirms God's divine preservation of His Word 100% pure in its copy, our Bible. He draws upon the New Testament scripture, 2 Timothy 3:15-17 for a proof text (emphasis mine):

(v15)  “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

(v16)  All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

(v17)  That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

Dr. Jones states:
"
Now we know that we do not have an original. The question is has God preserved His Word – the original text – although not the original piece of paper or vellum on which it may have been written?

Look at verse 15. Paul says to Timothy, "from a child you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation."  Paul is obviously not speaking of the "ORIGINAL" New Testament Scripture. Second Timothy was penned about A.D. 65. Further, Timothy was old enough to join Paul and Silas c.53 A.D. (
Acts 16:1-4). Thus, when Timothy was a child, there was no New Testament collection of Scripture anywhere. Nor was Paul speaking of the "ORIGINALS" of the Old Testament for there was not an original Old Testament piece of paper or vellum extant at that time. Wrestle with this! Come to grips with it! These are the verses upon which many of us base our faith and say we believe in the "ORIGINALS". Yet these very verses are not speaking of the original manuscripts!

The Bible itself clearly teaches that faithful copies of the originals are also inspired. The word "Scripture" in II Timothy 3:16-17 is translated from the Greek word "graphé". Graphé occurs 51 times in the Greek New Testament and at every occurrence it means "Scripture" – in fact, it usually refers to the Old Testament text. A perusal of the N.T. reveals that the Lord Jesus read from the "graphé" in the synagogue at Nazareth (
Luk.4:21) as did Paul in the synagogue at Thessalonica (Acts 17:2). The Ethiopian eunuch, returning home from worshipping at Jerusalem, was riding in his chariot and reading a passage of graphé (Acts 8:32-33). These were not the autographs that they were reading, they were copies – moreover, copies of copies! Yet the Word of God calls them graphé – and every graphé is "given by inspiration of God" (II Tim.3:16). Thus, the Holy Writ has testified and that testimony is that faithful copies of the originals are themselves inspired. Selah!

Therefore, it all comes down to a promise given by God – that He would preserve the text which He gave us. Timothy never saw an original when he was a child of either the Old or New Testament, yet in verse 16 God says that what Timothy learned as a child was given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

GOD SPEAKS

These witnesses provides us the historical testimony of the saints in their belief that the Word of God in its copy, our Bible, is kept 100% pure to all ages by divine preservation. So that we as they, can say our copy of the Word of God is 100% pure, as pure as the original received by divine inspiration, and therefore is identical, authentical - a genuine original! This is the high view of scripture, as contrasted to the low view of an almost pure Bible as articulated in  the Chicago Statement and held by the textual critics.

This promise is secured by both the Word and character of God, which are synonymous. Meaning, if God's Word is not good, neither is His character and if His character is not good, neither is His Word. You cannot denigrate God's Word without denigrating His character; they're opposite sides of the same coin. However we know both God's Word and character are good!  Why? Because He says so.

"God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"
  Numbers 23:19

In light of the above, we have only one decision to make, do we believe the Word and character of God? If we do, then we possess the 100% pure: inspired; inerrant and authoritative Word of God in its copy, our Bible. To use the favorite word of the saints in their Confessions when referring to their copy of God's Word (our Bible): it's authentical - a genuine original!  The 100% purity of the Word of God rests upon these two indispensable pillars, the doctrine of divine inspiration establishing the 100% purity of the originals, and the doctrine of divine preservation establishing the 100% purity of the copy (our Bible). This comprises the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy.


PROTESTANT LEADERS REJECT GOD'S PROMISE OF DIVINE PRESERVATION OF A 100% PURE BIBLE

CHICAGO STATEMENT


Yet this truth is rejected today for instead an almost pure Bible, as articulated in the
Chicago Statement and embraced by Protestantism. This is articulated below from Sections III and V, Exposition, C; Transmission and Translation of the Chicago Statement (emphasis and brackets mine):

"Since God has nowhere promised an inerrant transmission of Scripture it is necessary to affirm that only the autographic text of the original documents was inspired and to maintain the need of textual criticism as a means of detecting any slips that may have crept into the text in the course of its transmission.

Similarly, no translation [Bible] is or can be perfect, and all translations are an additional step away from the autographa. Yet the verdict of linguistic science is that English-speaking Christians, at least, are exceedingly well served in these days with a host of excellent translations and have no cause for hesitating to conclude that the true Word of God is within their reach.

This site is dedicated to providing pastors the information to decide which is true. These two divergent views are presented in the two columns below. The Chicago Statement is presented in the left column and that of the Word of God and the historical witness of the saints in the right. Both contain excerpts from my papers (referred to below) supporting the 100% pure Word of God in its copy, our Bible, as promised in the doctrine of divine preservation.


STANDARD BEARER THESIS

HAVE WE 'LOST' THE WORD OF GOD?

REV LOUIS KOLE

My thesis is we've departed from the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy that holds the Word of God is 100% pure in its copy, our Bible.
It's Biblical because the doctrine of the divine preservation of the 100% pure copy of the Word of God is clearly revealed in the Holy scriptures. It's Historical because this doctrine is the witness of the saints as memorialized in their Confessions of Faith, including our Baptist ancestry. Now, please allow me to make a very bold statement.

We have 'LOST' the Word of God
. How can we tell? Can we point to any Bible and say it's the 100% pure Word of God? If not, then we've 'lost' the Word of God to that degree. This has happened by changing what we mean when referring to the divine preservation of the Word of God in its copy, our Bible. Historically it meant our Bible is kept 100% pure by God, but that definition has changed. Today, divine preservation means man's restoration of the Bible to almost pure through the efforts of textual criticism. A good example which exemplifies this view is seen in the comments by
B.B. Warfield (1851-1921), professor of Theology at Princeton Seminary, when he says (emphasis mine):

“The inerrant autographs were a fact once; they may possibly be a fact again, when textual criticism has said its last word on the Bible text. In proportion as they are approaching in the processes of textual criticism, do we have an ever better and better Bible than the one we have now.” (Theodore P. Letis, 'The Ecclesiastical Text', p. 53)
 
This is the 'conservative' and 'evangelical' view as reflected in the Chicago Statement. However, the Biblical and historical meaning of inerrancy applies to both the original and copy of the Word of God as being 100% pure: inspired and inerrant. The scriptures teach the original was given by divine inspiration and the copy kept by divine preservation, both 100% pure. The purpose of this site is to demonstrate this, and to obtain a quick overview. (Either finish reading this Home page or go to my paper,
'Retaking the Hill of Biblical Inerrancy').


STANDARD BEARER PASTORS

WHAT WE CAN DO TO FULFILL OUR DIVINE CUSTODIANSHIP

What can we do to re-establish the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy - which means the Word of God is 100% pure in the original and copy, our Bible.


5 SUGGESTIONS FOR PASTORS


REMEMBER
 

We have been charged by God with the divine custodianship of His Word and flock for which we will give an account to Him, our Chief Shepherd, and our crown is based on our faithfulness.

TEACH 

Be of a 'ready mind' in discharging our custodianship of His sheep by teaching our church the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy, which is mission critical to the faith; "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God". 
Romans 10:17

MEMORIALIZE

Be of a 'ready mind' in discharging our custodianship of His Word by memorializing the above Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy in the Doctrinal Statement of our church as a legacy to future generations.

SHARE

Assist by distributing this information by forwarding the link to this website
to fellow pastors and posting it to your social websiteStandard Bearers @ 
www.standardbearers.net.

LEAD

Use our influence to help other pastors become more knowledgeable on this issue and in revising their Doctrinal Statements on the inerrancy of scripture to reflect the Biblical and historical doctrine.

“Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight [thereof], not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.” 
1Peter 5:2-4


RESOURCES FOR PASTORS


Here are some resources designed to assist in our understanding of this issue:

Retaking the Hill of Biblical Inerrancy: The Next Reformation - a brief overview of the issue of inerrancy.

God's Standard Bearers: Witnesses to THE Word of God - the Biblical & historical witness of the saint to inerrancy.

The Josiah Initiative - the resources addressing the issue of inerrancy.

The Fear of the Lord: Restoring the Biblical and Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy - in-depth presentation on inerrancy.


INVITATION


In addition,
Dr. Jones and I are available to help. If you have a group, church or pastors who want to learn more on this, Dr. Jones has a professional PowerPoint presentation which he narrates followed with questions and answers.

Learn more by reading the two columns below. The left column gives the Chicago Statement view of an almost pure Bible. The right column provides the view of scripture, the Westminster Confession  and the saints of a 100% pure Bible.

Or read my paper,
 Retaking the Hill of Biblical Inerrancy: The Next Reformation for a quick overview of the issue.

Thank you for taking time to visit our site. If you found this information helpful or have questions or suggestions please let me know.

Hymn ~ We Rest On Thee 

Louis M. Kole
louis.kole@standardbearers.net


 

Script embedded in HTML

WITNESS OF MAN

Almost Pure Bible

Chicago Statement 1978

"...God has nowhere promised
an inerrant transmission of Scripture...
Similarly, no translation [Bible]
is or can be perfect
"

THE CHICAGO STATEMENT WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy

The witness of man is best exemplified in the Chicago Statement of 1978. It rejects the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy taught in the Word of God and affirmed in the Confessions of the saints. Instead it says the copy of the Word of God, our Bible has errors, therefore is not 100% pure.  

This is articulated below from Sections III and V, Exposition, C; Transmission and Translation of
the Chicago Statement (emphasis and brackets mine):

"Since God has nowhere promised an inerrant transmission of Scripture it is necessary to affirm that only the autographic text of the original documents was inspired and to maintain the need of textual criticism as a means of detecting any slips that may have crept into the text in the course of its transmission.

Similarly, no translation [Bible] is or can be perfect, and all translations are an additional step away from the autographa. Yet the verdict of linguistic science is that English-speaking Christians, at least, are exceedingly well served in these days with a host of excellent translations and have no cause for hesitating to conclude that the true Word of God is within their reach.

When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. Scripture is inerrant, in the sense of being absolutely precise by modern standards, but in the sense of making good its claims and achieving that measure of focused truth at which its authors aimed."

Does the above surprise you that the Chicago Statement contradicts God? God says His Word is 100% pure as seen in our above Mission Statement. Do you believe your Bible is 100% pure, as God says and as the saints give witness- we ought to!

The Chicago Statement was produced in 1978 by the International Conference on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI).
The documents of the Chicago Statement are archived in the library at Dallas Theological Seminary (DTS. Now, let's learn more about who is the ICBI.

Note: (click to see list of
original signatures or typed list of signatories of the Chicago Statement).


WHERE THE ERROR BEGAN
International Council on Biblical Inerrancy

The
International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) was founded in 1977 to clarify and defend the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. It produced the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy in 1978 which was signed by the who’s who Protestants.

One of the framers of the ICBI, Dr. Jay Grimstead gives us the account of its formulation in his article,
'How the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy Began’, (emphasis mine):

"We see the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) Statement on Inerrancy as being a landmark church document, which was created in 1978 by the then largest, broadest, group of evangelical protestant scholars that ever came together to create a common, theological document in the 20th century.

It is probably the first systematically comprehensive, broadly based, scholarly, creed-like statement on the inspiration and authority of Scripture in the history of the church."
  
 

As I have said, the Chicago Statement departs from the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy. Its definition of inerrancy renders the term impotent and meaningless. Because it  applies only to the originals which do not exist, an
d not to the copy, our Bible; therefore their doctrine is defenseless. 

This fact has not gone unnoticed by the liberals who have taken conservatives to task on this very point as noted below.


DOES INERRANCY MATTER?
Dr. Roger Olson

In his article, Why ‘Inerrancy’ Doesn’t Matter, the liberals have taken the conservatives to task regarding their 'new' definition of inerrancy contained in the Chicago Statement.

Dr. Roger Olson, professor of theology at Baylor University’s George W. Truett Theological Seminary, states that conservatives hold to the term ‘inerrancy’ but have changed its Biblical meaning, thus rendering it an impotent and indefensible doctrine, has quoted from his article (emphasis and brackets mine):  

"Think about this: If the Bible’s authority depends on its inerrancy but only the original manuscripts were inerrant, then only the original manuscripts were authoritative. The logic is impeccable and irresistible. And if "inerrancy" is compatible with flawed approximations,faulty chronologies, and use of incorrect sources by the biblical authors, it is a meaningless concept.


Even its most ardent and staunch proponents admit no Bible is inerrant; they attribute inerrancy only to the original manuscripts which do not exist. They kill the ordinary meaning of the word with the death of a thousand qualifications. If you doubt that, please read the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy which usually is considered the standard evangelical account of the concept." 

Is Dr. Olson right, have the conservatives embraced a 'doublespeak' in their definition of inerrancy as articulated in the Chicago Statement?  Do they say one thing but mean another? Let's examine this claim further and the meaning of doublespeak from the article below.


'DOUBLESPEAK'
Dr. Ralph Elliott

"But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."  2Corinthians 2:4

Have conservatives unwittingly fallen into a kind of 'doublespeak' in their definition of the inerrancy of scripture? Dr. Ralph Elliott, head of the Old Testament department of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1958 addresses this issue. In his book published in 1992, the 'Genesis Controversy' he explains what he means by the term 'doublespeak' when he says (emphasis mine):
 
"Doublespeak’ has become an insidious disease within Southern Baptist life. Through the years, the program at Southern Seminary has acquainted students with the best in current research in the given fields of study. Often, however, this was done with an eye and ear for the ‘gallery’ and how much the ‘church trade’ would bear.

Professors and students learn to couch their beliefs in acceptable terminology and in holy jargon so that although thinking one thing, the speaker calculated so as to cause the hearer to affirm something else."
(The 'Genesis Controversy'; Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press, 1992; 33-34)

Laymen understand the term inerrancy to mean a 100% pure Bible. If the same term is employed without making them aware this meaning has changed to an almost pure Bible, we are guilty of 'doublespeak' whether we intended it or not.

The issue is further complicated because the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) does not say whether they're referring to the original or the copy of scripture, our Bible, in their statement on the inerrancy of scripture as contained in the
2000 Baptist Faith and Message (BF&M) when it states:

I. The Scriptures
"
The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter.

Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy.
It reveals the principles by which God judges us, and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. All Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine revelation."

The raging debate on Biblical inerrancy is whether we believe the copy of the Word of God, our Bible is 100% pure, or only the original is. Yet the BF&M says; "Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy", what are they referring to; the copy or the original?  The BF&M is silent on this point which is central to our faith.

In 'the day', when inerrancy meant a 100% pure Bible, this distinction was not necessary. However, in our current enviroment it's essential, as seen in the following comments by a christian leader, who denigrates the inerrancy of the Word of God in its copy, our Bible.

Dr. James A. Sanders, served on the committee of the United Bible Society that put out the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. He is also professor of religion and president of the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center for Preservation and Research at Claremont Graduate University in California. His comments encapsulates the two opposing meanings of the term 'inerrancy'; that of the leadership and that of the laymen. when he says (emphasis mine):

“The NRSV is not the Bible; no translation is the Bible. So what is the Bible? What and whence these texts? I think it is time for us to stop fooling the people, making them think there is just one Bible and that our Bible committee got closer to it than their committee did.

I have been told by some that this would just destroy the Bible
because lay folk still want to think of the Bible as somehow inerrant.
It may well be that if there should ever be the possibility of discussing the text of Isaiah with Isaiah, he might very well say, ‘but I did not say that’.”
(Sanders, The Dead Sea Scrolls After Forty Years, 1991, p.60,71; published by Biblical Archeology Review)

The concern for a clearer message on the inerrancy of scripture in its copy is reasonable so as to differeniate ourselves from this error. Is it time for pastors to discharge our divine custodianship of the Word of God and His flock; by teaching and protecting them from this error which began in the Garden,
"Hath God said?"

Since the Chicago Statement was signed by the 'blue chips' of Protestantism, let's now present in laymen terms its belief on the inerrancy of scripture so we can all be informed and on the same page.


AN UNCERTAIN TRUMPET
The Chicago Statement

"For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?"
  
1Corinthians 14:8

The layman assumes their pastor believes the Word of God is inerrant, meaning 100% pure in the copy, our Bible. However, where does a pastor point, to show where this is written? In the absence of such, it becomes particularly troublesome if the pastor also embraces the Chicago Statement, which says the opposite. In this situation, it would appear we're using 'doublespeak', when we're just uniformed.

In the interest of informing pastors, I have presented the essence of the Chicago
Statement in seven points, distilled and paraphrased into layman’s language. This is the 'conservatives’ and evangelicals’ definitive statement on the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy, signed by the leadership of Protestantism.

For affect, I have presented these seven points as if pastors we're addressing their congregations from the pulpit on Sunday morning and teaching them the tenets of the Chicago Statement on the inerrancy of scripture which
they have embraced themselves.

"I would like to be sure I have taught you the truth about the inerrancy of the Word of God. Therefore here is what I believe on the inerrancy of scripture and hope you will follow my example of faith. I believe...


1)  I believe
God never promised to preserve a Bible with ‘total truth’; 

2)  I believe t
he only 'total truth' of the Word of God was in the originals which were inspired by God, but which no longer exist;


3)  I believe the Bible is not total truth’ due to the ‘slips’ by those making the copies of them, but not to be concerned since none of the ‘total truth’ has been destroyed that would prevent a reader from being saved;


4)  I believe there is no Bible with ‘total truth’;

5)  I believe It was never the expectation or goal of the saints to have a Bible with ‘total truth’;

6)  I believe since the saints never expected a Bible with ‘total truth’ it is no issue to have a Bible with errors;

7)  I believe the saint’s definition of inerrancy embraced a Bible whose ‘total truth’ contained errors.

Do the above statements alarm you? Are we willing to stand in our pulpit next Sunday morning and say to those whom we have been charged by God to teach and protect as their shepherd?

Based on the above statements would those sitting in the pews be right in questioning the authority of the Word of God? Our generation is unsure about the veracity of the Word of God due to the pastor's failure to 'sound a certain trumpet' and articulate a clear doctrine of the inerrancy of the copy of the Word of God, our Bible as being 100% pure.

This erosion of the veracity and authority of the Word of God will continue until we return to the pier of Biblical inerrancy. The ‘hemorrhaging’ of New Testament Greek texts is due to this unbiblical view of man’s restoration of the Word of God, rather than embracing its divine preservation, 100% pure.
 
It will not be stopped just by reclaiming our institution, but only by an accurate diagnosis and remedy of the problem. The remedy is to return to the Biblical doctrine of inerrancy which includes divine inspiration and divine preservation and our pastors to teach it to our churches. If we do not, then below is perhaps our future
.


DAWNING OF A NEW DAY
Dr. Darrel Falk - BioLogos 

The above witness of man to inerrancy of scripture anticipates the day when their view of an almost pure Bible will be accepted without question as the Biblical meaning of
the doctrine.

This is articulated in an article by
Darrell Falk of BioLogos, a group of Christians who propose promoting a perspective on the origins of life that is both theologically and scientifically sound.

Dr. Falk reveals in his article, '
Dawning of a New Day' what he considers 'theologically sound' when he says (emphasis mine):

“Will we never be able to show the followers of Albert Mohler, John MacArthur and others that Christian theology doesn’t stand or fall on how we understand Genesis 1 or the question of whether Adam and Eve were the sole genetic progenitors of the human race?

These are extremely critical issues to many and the task of showing in a convincing manner that evangelical theology doesn’t depend on the age of the earth, and it doesn’t depend upon whether Adam was made directly from dust will likely take decades before it will be convincing to all.”

Unfortunately, pastors who would not subscribe to the above have unwittingly laid the foundation for it in their embrace of the Chicago Statement, "how have the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished!"

The assault on the veracity and authority of the Word of God will not stop here. The Chicago Statement has opened the flood gates and it will only continue unless pastors begin teaching our churches the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy,
sooner rather than later.

If we do not, then here's a sneak preview of the coming attractions. The 'doctrine' of the 
Emergent Church on the inerrancy of scripture
makes the Chicago Statement and BioLogos look 'conservative'.



THE EMERGENT CHURCH
A 'Living' Word of God

"The eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing."  Ecclesiastes 1:8

First the Chicago Statement, then BioLogos and next the Emergent Church. The leaders of the Emergent Church view the Word of God as a living document (sound familiar). This means its truth is dynamic, emerging (hence their name) and interpretive to each generation by one's personal experience.

They reject that scripture is static (fixed) and applicable to all generations. In short, they believe each person has their 'private interpretation'. Yet we know the Word of God teaches us; "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." 
1Peter 2:20

This is what happens once the veracity and authority of the Word of God is denigrated. We see it in our day as in the days of the Judges, when scripture lost its final authority; "In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes."
  Judges 17:6 

David C. Parker, is the Edward Cadbury Professor of Theology and Director of the Centre for the Editing of Texts in Religion at University of Birmingham (UK). He subscribes to the tenets of the Emergent Church and makes these assertions as follows (emphasis mine):

"The text is changing. Every time that I make an edition of the Greek New Testament, or anybody does, we change the wording. We are maybe trying to get back to the oldest possible form but, paradoxically, we are creating a new one.

Every translation is different, every reading is different, and although there’s been a tradition in parts of Protestant Christianity to say there is a definitive single form of the text, the fact is you can never find it. There is never ever a final form of the text." 
(BBC Radio 4 program, "The Oldest Bible: David C. Parker, Wilipedia)
 
“The gospels are not archives of traditions but living texts,”…and, therefore, “the concept of a Gospel that is fixed in shape, authoritative, and final as a piece of literature has to be abandoned.”
(The Living Text of the Gospels, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997; p.119, 93)

“The free text indicates that to at least some early Christians, it was more important to hand on the spirit of Jesus' teaching than to remember the letter.... The material about Jesus was preserved in an interpretive rather than an exact fashion."
(Scripture is Tradition, Theology 1994, p.15)

The extent of Dr. Parker's views may not be shared by all in the Emergent Church, but it provides a good barometer where it's trending. Perhaps you are beginning to realize where this madness will lead. The only antidote for the above is the Word of God and returning to the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy.

Otherwise our legacy will be that of an unfaithful servant who ran when the wolves came and did not protect His flock; "hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown."
  Rev 3:11

As pastors we've been charged by God with the custodianship of His Word and flock, a responsibility we do not have the liberty to shun and for which we will give an account of to Him, which should make us sober (emphasis mine):

"Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I [am] pure from the blood of all [men]. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." 
Acts 20:26-28

Contrary to Dr. Parker, there is a "definitive single form of the text" of the Word of God which is the purpose of this website to defend. Dr. Floyd Nolen Jones Th.D., Ph.D., a foremost authority on this subject, provides the identity of the "definite single form of the text" of the Word of God, 'LOST' to those who subscribe to an almost pure Bible. In his bookWhich Version Is The Bible? Dr. Jones states:

"We appeal to the consensus of history for determining the boundaries of the texts of Scripture. We believe these texts are represented in the Masoretic Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek Textus Receptus New Testament, both being the texts of the King James Bible of 1611.”

Where do we stand today in our witness to the 100% pure copy of the Word of God, our Bible? Do we believe we possess a "definitive single form of the text" of the Word of God, or are we looking for man to restore to us an almost pure Bible?  Will we finish well?  Will our legacy be, we restored the Word of God
as King Josiah or we  'LOST' it has his father King Manasseh? 
2Kings 21-22



WHAT CAN PASTORS DO?
Our Divine Custodianship

“Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight [thereof], not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.”
1Peter 5:2-4

5 Things Pastors Can Do:

REMEMBER

To remember we have been charged by God with the divine custodianship of His Word and flock for which we will give an account to Him, our Chief Shepherd, and our crown is based on our faithfulness.

TEACH

Discharge our custodianship of His sheep by teaching our church the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy which is mission critical to the faith.

MEMORIALIZE

Discharge our custodianship of His Word by
memorializing the above Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy in the Doctrinal Statement of our church as a legacy to future generations.

SHARE

Assist in distributing this information by forwarding this link to the 
Standard Bearers website to fellow pastors or posting it on your social websites,  www.standardbearers.net.

LEAD

We can use our influence to help other pastors become more knowledgable on this issue and in revise their Doctrinal Statements on the inerrancy of scripture to reflect the Biblical and historical doctrine.

Dr. Jones and I are available to help. If you have a group, either your church or others pastor who want to learn more on this, Dr. Jones has a professional PowerPoint presentation which he narrates followed with questions and answers. To get more information on this resource please email me, Louis Kole @ kolelm@gmail.com.

Below, I have provided a sample Doctrinal
Statement of the Inerrancy of Scripture which reflects the Biblical and historical doctrine. This is the most important of the Doctrinal Statements of your church, since all others rest on the veracity and authority of the Word of God, which this affirms unequivocally.

"We stand as witnesses to the 100% pure, inerrant Word of God; as being divinely inspired, divinely preserved and divinely identified.

Our witness is to the Old Testament in the language originally given as received from the saints in the Hebrew texts under the name of the Masoretic text.

Our witness is to the New Testament in the language originally given as received from the saints in the Greek texts under the name of the Textus Receptus. 

Our witness is these texts have been faithfully preserved by God 100% pure and divinely identified by Him through the historical witness of the saints.
 
Our witness is these texts have been faithfully translated into English in the King James Bible of 1611.


Our witness is the divine inspiration of scripture includes the copy of the original text which we now possess as identified herein, not the translation of the copy into another language." 

The above doctrinal statement on Biblical inerrancy echoes the witness of the Word of God and the saints as we will see in the next column to your right. Our success in accomplishing the above will be our enduring legacy, as the saints are to us in their Confessions.

SUMMARY
Rev Louis Kole

In summarizing, the above witness of man rejects the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy. The Chicago Statement holds to a low view of scripture, one that says the Word of God is almost pure. This denigrates the Word of God and undermines faith in its veracity and authority. In the absent of a repudiation of this error it will 'set up' the next generations for a greater deception and destruction than the present one.

The high view of scripture affirms the Word of God is 100% pure in the copy, our Bible. This is the witness of the Word of God and the saints in their Confessions. This is the only basis for establishing the veracity and authority of the Word of God.

Now let's compare the above statements to the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy as taught in the Word of God and witnessed to by the saints. Please go to the top of the next column.
 


STANDARD BEARERS PAPERS
On Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy

For further study see my papers:

Retaking the Hill of Biblical Inerrancy: The Next Reformation 
A brief overview of the issue of inerrancy


God's Standard Bearers: Witnesses to THE Word of God 
The Biblical & historical witness to inerrancy

The Josiah Initiative 
The resources addressing inerrancy

The Fear of the Lord: Restoring the Biblical and Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy 
An in-depth presentation on inerrancy

To view these papers, click on them here or go to the navigation pane on the left side of this page, under the heading Louis Kole then click on the link to the paper.


  
INVITATION
Thank you for taking time to visit our site. If you found this information helpful or have questions or suggestions please let me know.

Louis M. Kole
louis.kole@standardbearers.net


  

WITNESS OF GOD

100% Pure Bible

Westminster Confession 1646

"Being immediately inspired by God,
and, by His singular care and providence,
kept
pure in all ages, are therefore
authentical [identical to original]"

WORD OF GOD WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy 

Let’s hear from THE Witness, God Himself, as to His testimony regarding the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy and then the witness of the saints.

That affirms the Word of God is 100% pure; given by Him 100% pure in the original by divine inspiration and is kept by Him 100% pure in the copy by divine preservation to- all ages. 

The Doctrine of Divine Inspiration
Affirms the degree of the purity of the Word of God- 100% pure, 'purified seven times'. Given by Him, not man, therefore it's 100% pure, not almost pure. This promise is highlighted in blue.


The Doctrine of Divine Preservation
Affirms the duration of the purity of the Word of God- forever!  Kept by Him, not man, therefore it's 100% pure- to all ages. This promise is highlighted in red.

These two promises are illustrated below as taught in the 10 proof texts from the Word of God

1) “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever.” Psalms 12:6-7

2) "The counsel [word] of the LORD standeth forever, the thoughts [words ] of his heart to all generations." Psalms 33:11

3)  “For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth [word] endureth to all generations." Psalm 100:5

4) “The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments [words] are sure. They stand fast forever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.” Psalms 111:7-8

5) “LAMED. Forever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: Thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.” Psalms 119:89-90

6) “Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments [words] are truth. Concerning thy testimonies [words], I have known of old that thou hast founded them forever.” Psalms 119:151-152

7) “As for me, this is my covenant [word] with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and forever.” Isaiah 59:21

8) “I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be forever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.” Ecclesiastes 3:14

9) “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law [word], till all be fulfilled.” Matthew 5:18

10) “But the word of the Lord endureth forever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” 1Peter 1:25; see Isaiah 40:8


THE HISTORICAL LUTHERAN WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy 

Johannes Andrew Quenstedt (1617-1688) Quenstedt, along with Martin Chemnitz and Johann Gerhard are considered the top three influential leaders and theologians of the post-Reformation Lutheran church. He was a professor at Wittenberg and his greatest work, Theologia Didactico-Polemica Sive Systema Theologicum (1685), is considered one of the most important works of Lutheran theology.

In it he gives the Reformer’s view of the copy of the Word of God, as kept by divine preservation in relationship to the original (autograph) as received by divine inspiration. He believed the copy was identical to
the original received by the Apostles (emphasis & brackets mine):

“We believe, as is our duty, that the providential care of God has always watched over the original and primitive texts [copy] of the canonical Scriptures in such a way that we can be certain that the sacred codices which we now have in our hands [copy] are those which existed at the time of Jerome and Augustine, nay at the time of Christ Himself and His Apostles [i.e. meaning their ‘copy’ is identical to the ‘originals’].”

Furthermore, Quenstedt offers us insight into the Reformers understanding on the doctrine of divine inspiration:

“The Holy Spirit not only inspired in the prophets and apostles the content and the sense contained in Scripture, or the meaning of the words, so that they might of their own pleasure clothe and furnish these thoughts with their own style and their own words; but the Holy Spirit actually supplied, inspired, and dictated the very words and each and every term individually.”

This Lutheran witness provides us the testimony of the Reformation saints in their belief that the copy Word of God is kept 100% pure to all ages by divine preservation.

So that we as they, can say our copy of the Word of God, the Bible is 100% pure, as pure as the original received by divine inspiration, and therefore is identical, authentical; a genuine original! This high view of scripture was not limited to the Lutherans. This was the view of the Presbyterians as well, who beliefs are known as Calvinism or Reformed Theology.


THE HISTORICAL PRESBYTERIAN WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy

Let’s hear the Presbyterian witness to the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy that affirms the Word of God is 100% pure; given 100% pure in the original by divine inspiration and kept 100% pure in the copy by divine preservation- to all ages.

Francis Turretin (1623-1687)
Pastor, theologian and leader of Reformed Theology (Calvinism) of the Church and Academy of Geneva, and one of the authors of the
Helvetic Consensus Formula (1675), adopted by the Reformed Church, and next to the Heidelberg Catechism (1563) is the most generally recognized confession of the Reformed Church.

His work,
Institutio Theologiae Elencticae (1679) was the standard introductory work used for Reformed theological education for more nearly two hundred years and required reading at Princeton Seminary, the citadel of Protestant orthodoxy for many years.

In it he states what is meant by the Reformers in regards to their copy of the Word of God, kept by divine preservation in relationship to the original (autograph) received by divine inspiration. He believed their copy was identical to the original as received by the Apostles (emphasis & brackets mine):

“By original texts, we do not mean the autographs [original] written by the hand of Moses, of the prophets and the apostles, which certainly do not now exist. We mean their apographs [copy of original] which are so called because they set forth to us the word of God in the very words of those who wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Again, this Presbyterian witness provides us the testimony of the Reformation saints in their belief that the copy Word of God is kept 100% pure to all ages by divine preservation.

So that we as they, can say our copy of the Word of God, the Bible is 100% pure, as pure as the original received by divine inspiration, and therefore is identical, authentical; a genuine original! This high view of scripture was not limited to a few theologians of the Reformation.

It's contained in all the Confessions of the Reformation.


THE HISTORICAL CONFESSIONS WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy 

The following Confessions of the Reformation all give witness to the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy. That affirms the Word of God is 100% pure; given 100% pure in the original by divine inspiration and kept 100% pure in the copy by divine preservation- to all ages. Let’s hear from their ‘jury box’ as it renders their verdict on the doctrine of divine preservation (emphasis mine):

1646 The Westminster Confession

"...being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them.” 

1687/1689 The Second London Confession

“…Therefore it pleased the Lord …protecting it against the corruption of the flesh and the malice of Satan and the world, - it pleased the Lord to commit His revealed Truth wholly unto writing……inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages. They are therefore authentic,…”

1742 The Philadelphia Confession (Baptist)

“…Therefore it pleased the Lord…against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing….being immediately inspired by God, and by His singular care and providence kept pure in all age, or therefore authentic;...”

All the above Confessions of the Reformation affirm the high view of the Word of God, kept 100% pure to all ages by divine preservation:

“...by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical;”

Let’s take a moment for a little closer look at the Westminster Confession considered the ‘Mother’ of all Confessions since those which follow it contain the same phraseology, giving witness to the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy.


THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy 

We will briefly exegete the Westminster Confession as to its doctrine on divine preservation which affirms the Word of God is kept 100% pure- to all ages.

Also, I have used an outline to key the Westminster Confession to Psalms 12:6-7 to show their witness parallels that of the Word of God. 

Chapter I – Of the Holy Scripture - VIII.

"The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God,
(1) and, by His singular care and providence,
(2)
kept
(3) pure in
(4) all ages
,
(5) are therefore authentical; so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them."

Psalms 12:6-7:

“The words of the LORD are
(3) pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth,
(3) purified seven times.
(1) Thou shalt
(2) keep them, O LORD,
(1) thou shalt
(2) preserve them
(4) from this generation forever."

As we can see from the above, the framers of the Westminster Confession held
to the doctrine of divine preservation, believing the Word of God is kept by Him 100% pure- to all ages. They maintain this purity is the basis of its veracity and authority, being it’s
authentical as the original:
“kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical;”.

Observe their choice of words in describing their witness to the copy of the Word of God as being authentical- what a statement! Webster’s 1828 dictionary defines authentical as “having a genuine original”.

They held their copy of the Word of God (i.e. Bible) remained authentical or identical, as genuine as the original and therefore as authoritative as the original. They were shouting out their witness for all generations to come as to the purity of the copy of God’s Word; kept 100% pure, without error by divine preservation, not man’s restoration of an almost pure Word of God.

As we have seen this
is the same witness as the Lutherans and Presbyterian saints who believed the Holy Spirit broods over and keep God'ss Word 100% pure to all ages, even in our present day (emphasis and brackets mine):

Presbyterian Witness - Turretin

"...we now have in our hands are those which existed at the time of Jerome and Augustine, nay at the time of Christ Himself and His Apostles...”

Lutheran Witness - Quenstedt

“...By original texts, we do not mean the autographs written by the hand of Moses, of the prophets and the apostles, which certainly do not now exist. We mean their
apographs [copy]which are so called because they set forth to us the word of God in the very words of those who wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”

The Psalmist affirming:

“The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul:

the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart:

the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.

The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever:

the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.

More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.”
  Psalms 19:7-11.


THE HISTORICAL BAPTIST WITNESS
To Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy

The inception of our present day Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) was in May of 1845. The Charleston Baptist Association of South Carolina organized it in a meeting at the First Baptist Church of Augusta in South Carolina.

Our first ‘adopted’ Confession was the, Philadelphia Confession of Faith 1742, as affirmed by Timothy and Denise George, a literarily prolific couple in Southern Baptist history, when they state (emphasis mine):

“The Philadelphia Confession of Faith was transplanted to the Charleston Baptist Association in South Carolina. It soon became the most widely accepted, definitive confession among Baptists in America, both North and South. Each of the 293 "delegates," as they were then called, who gathered in Augusta to organize the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845, belonged to congregations and associations which had adopted the Philadelphia/Charleston Confession of Faith as their own.”

The Southern Baptist Convention’s first Confession, Philadelphia Confession of Faith 1742, embraces the Biblical and historical doctrine of inerrancy like those of the Reformation: that the Word of God is 100% pure - given by Him 100% pure in
the original by divine inspiration and kept by Him 100% pure in the copy by divine preservation- to all ages.

1742 The Philadelphia Confession (Baptist)

Chapter I – The Holy Scripture
1.
"Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times, and in divers manners to reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His church; and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment, and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased.”

8
."The Old Testament in Hebrew, (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek, which (at the time of the writing of it) was most generally known to the nations, being immediately inspired by God, and by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them.”

The Philadelphia Confession of Faith (1742) is unequivocal in its affirmation of Bible inerrancy. The writers of this Confession embrace the same standard of inerrancy: ‘authentical’, identical, 100% pure, as genuine as the original; as its predecessor, the Westminster Confession- the ‘mother’ of all Confessions.


SUMMARY
Rev Louis Kole

In summarizing, the witness of the Word of God is sufficient in itself, even in the absence of these Confessions we have reviewed. These Confessions are provided to demonstrate the high view of scripture, which holds to a 100% pure Word of God is not a novel idea. Rather, the newcomer is the low view of scripture, which says the Word of God is almost pure.


STANDARD BEARERS PAPERS
On Biblical & Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy

For further study see my papers:

Retaking the Hill of Inerrancy: The Next Reformation 
A brief overview of the issue of inerrancy


God's Standard Bearers: Witnesses to THE Word of God 
The Biblical & historical witness to inerrancy

The Josiah Initiative 
The resources addressing inerrancy

The Fear of the Lord: Restoring the Biblical and Historical Doctrine of Inerrancy 
An in-depth presentation on inerrancy.

To view these papers, click on them here or go to the navigation pane on the left side of this page, under the heading Louis Kole then click on the link to the paper.


  
INVITATION
Thank you for taking time to visit our site. If you found this information helpful or have questions or suggestions please let me know.

Louis M. Kole
louis.kole@standardbearers.net


  
Website Builder