Biblical inerrancy: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Line 51:
 
== Inerrancy in autographic texts and modern versions ==
Those who hold the inerrancy of the Bible candon't disagreeall agree as to whether inerrancy refers to modern Bibles or only to the original, autographic texts. There are also disagreements about whether, because the autographic texts no longer survive, modern texts can be claimed to be inerrant.<ref>Cowan, SB. and Wilder, TL., ''In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture'', B&H Publishing Group, 2013, p. 55.[https://books.google.com/books?id=ChpkAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA55]</ref> Article X of the Chicago statement agrees that the inspiration for the words of the Bible can only strictly be applied to the autographs. However, the same article asserts that the original text "can be ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy", so that the lack of the originals does not affect the claim of biblical inerrancy of such recovered, modern texts.<ref name="ChicX"/> [[Robert Saucy]], for instance, reports that writers have argued that "99 percent of the original words in the New Testament are recoverable with a high degree of certainty."<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=SqL8-Gg96KUC&pg=PT130 Saucy, R., ''Scripture'', Thomas Nelson Inc, 2001]</ref>
 
== Textual tradition of the New Testament ==