Recap thus far
In my 1st article, I compared Roman Catholic doctrine with the Bible, exposing the many vital errors of the church. In Part 2, we looked at how the canon of scripture was formed. We understand that no one person or group alone determined what was included and excluded in our Bible. Even though the newly organized Roman Catholic Church added some seven books of the Apocrypha to the Canonical books, not all Christians agreed with this addition. It was viewed as a corruption of the pure Word of God.
We also learned that other “Christian” groups have added other books to their canon of scripture. All “Christian” groups, for the most part, accept the 66 books of the Bible that most Christians accept. The issue is that they add other books, church tradition, and church teaching to their canon. Their canon becomes mutable and dynamic, more fitted to a belief in moral relativism than objective absolute truth. Do they believe their canon? Surprisingly, the answer is probably not. Disappointingly, most Evangelicals do not believe in absolute truth. Makes one wonder what they think of the Word of God. That is a shocking admission. I expect that blatant apostasy from liberal and progressive “Christian” churches, but not from Evangelical Churches. Amazing, how quickly things are deteriorating.
This chapter will focus attention on the many ways that the Bible has been and continues to be under assault, even today. Pretend that you are an enemy of God for a moment. What strategies would you employ to undermine the authority and credibility of the Word of God? Here is a short list.
- Create doubt in people’s minds about what God said. “Yea, hath God said?”
- Deny what the Word of God proclaims. “Thou shalt surely not die.”
- Find discoveries that put into question what you thought was the settled Word of God.
- Create scientific theories which undermine the historicity and credibility of the Word of God.
- Punish and persecute those who refuse to doubt the Word of God, those who refuse to stop reading the Word of God, and those who believe and practice the Word of God.
- Manufacture novel explanations that appear to make sense but are contrary to what the Word of God teaches.
- Convince everyone that the Bible is just like any other ancient manuscript. Convince them that the Bible is not the work of an almighty supernatural being who claims to be the creator of the universe and the savior of mankind. Teach people that the Bible is nothing more than the writings of religious men and must be understood in naturalistic terms only. The supernatural and miraculous are not allowed to be considered as literal truth.
History demonstrates how the Roman Catholic Church has been and still is a powerful force in the world that uses some or all of these strategies to weaken the authority and credibility of the Word of God, the Bible. This chapter will examine how this has been done over the centuries.
- Punish and persecute those who refuse to doubt the Word of God, those who refuse to stop reading the Word of God, and those who believe and practice the Word of God.
Once the Roman Catholic Church gained control over the remains of the Roman Empire and combined church and state, we entered a period known as the Dark Ages. For about 1000 years, the Roman Catholic Church tried to keep the Word of God, the Bible, out of the hands of the common man and woman. Catholics may not be aware of this sad truth. Other Christians may also be unaware of the great lengths the Roman Church went to separate Christians from the Word of God. It is a big part of the dark history of the Roman Catholic Church.
The end of the Dark Ages was in some considerable measure accomplished by making the Bible accessible to the common man and woman. That eventually led to the Great Reformation under Martin Luther and many others. With the invention of the movable type printing press, the word of God spread quickly around the world. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church was burning Bibles and other religious material that they disagreed with. They were persecuting Bible believing Christians, stealing their reputations, property, and lives. (In Part 4, we will consider in much more detail the Persecution of Christians by the Roman Catholic Church.)
Vastly improved dissemination of the Bible dealt a severe blow to the Roman Catholic Church because it exposed many lies the Church had concealed in darkness for centuries during the Dark Ages. The Roman Catholic Church responded by creating a new organization as a counter to the Reformation called the Society of Jesus, or the Jesuits, in the middle of the 16th century. An entire article will be dedicated to the Jesuits.
In these articles, we will examine the history of the early Christian Church, the Jesuits, and the Papacy. The attack on the Word of God has never abated since the creation and the Garden of Eden until today. Much more evidence will be presented in these articles. You will read about a 1000-year period when the Roman Catholic Church outlawed the Bible for Christians. Those who refused to comply were often burned to death along with their Bibles and books.
- Find discoveries that put into question what you thought was the settled Word of God.
That brings us to the discovery of two supposedly ancient Greek manuscripts in the 1800s. These two discoveries have been used extensively to destroy confidence in the Word of God. The serpent couldn’t be more pleased.
In the 19th century, two manuscripts were discovered that were housed by Roman Catholic groups. These two manuscripts are called Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The unbelieving ‘Christian’ world welcomed these discoveries because they cast doubt on the Word of God used for centuries (These terms are used interchangeably: The Received Text, the Authorized Version, and the Traditional Text).
As mentioned, in the 19th century, there were two discoveries of ancient scripture. (There have been other less significant discoveries in the 20th century.) That led to the drafting of a new Greek New Testament and a substantial rewrite of the Authorized Version of the Bible that the English-speaking world had used for hundreds of years. In 1880, the Greek New Testament underwent a radical rewrite based on these two supposedly older and better manuscripts. That rewrite drew from some of the 14 oldest manuscripts and fragments, in contrast to the 25,000 texts and or pieces of Greek and other languages used to create the Traditional Text. Imagine that. Because these few older manuscripts were discovered (mainly just Vaticanus and Sinaiticus), some Bible scholars set aside the 25,000 other witnesses and made numerous changes to the text, representing the vast majority of manuscripts. I find that remarkably disgusting.
These older texts were assumed to be better texts because they were closer to the time of their original writing. The majority of extant manuscripts are of a later date. This new Greek Text of the New Testament has been used in current Bible translations since 1881. Two scholars, Westcott and Hort, primarily used these two important ancient manuscripts: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Many Christians applaud these newer translations, but others do not. The reason they don’t is that the newer translations alter the words and meaning of some fundamental truths and doctrines of the Bible.
Because some critics falsely claim that the older a manuscript is, the better it must be, modern Bible translators have been using just a few texts (Vaticanus primarily and Sinaiticus) that disagree with each other in many thousands of instances as a basis for our new translations. Just as importantly, both of these two primary texts have the hands of the Roman Catholic Church all over them. At the very least, that should raise suspicion about these two codices. And in the opinion of some, that fact should automatically disqualify them from consideration. Why? The history and evil character of the Roman Catholic Church will be highlighted in these articles. Jesus said a bad tree can’t produce good fruit. What eventually became the Roman Catholic Church institution is a bad tree.
This is the good tree that we can and should trust. We have literally over 25,000 old manuscripts in Greek, Latin, or other languages, or portions thereof, that almost all agree with each other. But newer translations of the Bible are based on just two supposedly older Greek manuscripts. And these two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) disagree with each other in thousands of instances. Imagine that if you will. Two manuscripts (which disagree with each other in thousands of instances in just the four gospels) found in the Roman Catholic Church (one in the Vatican Library and the other in a Catholic monastery), which have suppressed and outlawed the Bible for more than 1,000 years, set aside 25,000 witnesses that substantially agree with each other. Am I out of my mind to think that it is simply ridiculous?
Those who seek to destroy confidence in or cast doubt on the Word of God are enemies of God, the truth, and humanity. The serpent has had lots of help over the centuries in casting doubt on the Word of God. The Roman Catholic Church has been one of his most important allies. Much evidence to validate that claim will be provided in these articles.
Since before Christ died and rose from the dead, men and women have desired the pure Word of God. For the last 2,000 years, God’s word has been written in various languages. Early Christians, based on the promises contained in the Word of God, believed that they had the pure Word of God all this time. Imagine such faith. In contrast with such great faith are the Bible critics of yesterday and today, who are still not sure anyone has the real Word of God.
In 1870, two scholars, Westcott and Hort, revised the Greek text of the Bible. They believed that the Greek Textus Receptus was corrupt. Why did they think that? Because of recent findings of supposedly two older manuscripts found in the Vatican and a monastery. They believed these two ancient texts would correct the errors of the KJV of the Bible. They thought that the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts were older and, therefore, better manuscripts. Consequently, the English language Bible in the KJV was wrong in many instances, for at least the previous 300 years.
Others of us believe that God has always preserved His word, and humanity has always had the pure word of God. Newer translations rewrite the Word of God, in some significant ways. Making material alterations to God’s word is strictly forbidden by God Himself. What follows is but one example of very bad translation that is the fruit of the tree planted by Westcott and Hort.
“The words of the LORD are pure words; as silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times. Thou O LORD, wilt keep them; thou wilt preserve him from this generation forever.” NASB.
“The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever.” KJV.
Do you see the difference? The NASB says that the LORD will preserve “him,” not His words, from that generation forever. The subject matter is the Word of God, not a person. The NASB has altered the KJV so that the Bible doesn’t say that God will preserve His words forever. What a travesty of translation from “two of the most trustworthy manuscripts”, according to scholar and theologian, Dr. Charles Ryrie. Again, how can we trust that we do have the pure Word of God? Is our Bible just a collection of uninspired men’s words? The KJV tells me that I can trust that God has and will preserve His words forever. Forever means forever.
Older is the best, or is it? What is Dr. Charles Ryrie talking about when he writes that “two of the most trustworthy manuscripts” say something other than what the KJV or Authorized Version says? He is talking about two of the oldest Greek manuscripts found thus far. They are (Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph)), both of which have thousands of different renderings than what the translators of the KJV used as a primary Greek text. Ryrie says these are two of the “most trustworthy” manuscripts. Really?
Talk is cheap, Dr. Ryrie. These two manuscripts disagree with each other in thousands of places (3036 in the four gospels alone per Wikipedia) and they disagree with the authorized version (KJV) in over 30,000 places, yet they are the most trustworthy. Seriously! No wonder it is so hard to find a trustworthy scholar and theologian.
Wikipedia quotes Dean John William Burgon, who did an exhaustive analysis of these two manuscripts, as saying, “It is, in fact, easier to find two consecutive verses in which these two MSS differ from each other than two consecutive verses in which they entirely agree.” Imagine that. Yet Ryrie and others claim that these two corrupt codices are the most trustworthy. Forgive me, but I find that disgusting. What is their real agenda?
Ryrie’s comment suggests that the KJV translators were not aware of these alternative renderings found in these two “superior because they are older” manuscripts. That is not true at all. You will learn that Erasmus refused to use the Vaticanus codex in his work because of its corruptions. And taken together, these two corrupt, but older, forgeries alter the Authorized Version Greek text 36,191 times. (See Dr. Grady’s book, Final Authority, page 262).
It should be remembered that the revision committee of Wescott and Hort agreed to limit its changes to the traditional or received text to “plain and clear errors only.” Were there 36,000 plain and clear errors? No possible way. This is what you get when you employ godless and dishonest “Biblical” scholars to do the work that only a man or woman of God should be doing. Godless scholars lie and deceive. They do whatever it takes to corrupt the Word of God.
And most importantly, older doesn’t mean better. Generally, older might mean something important, but not when considering the transmission of the Word of God. The material that the Bible was written on, before the printing press and mass production of paper, was much different than what we have today. Scripture from antiquity had a shelf life. Scripture would wear out because of frequent use and require that a new copy be made by hand. Being made by hand meant that there were very few copies of scripture due to the high cost and time required. Much effort and time went into copying the Bible to ensure accuracy. Men of God took the job very seriously, as if their lives depended on being faithful to God. It did.
- Convince everyone that the Bible is just like any other ancient manuscript. Convince them that the Bible is not the work of an almighty supernatural being who claims to be the creator of the universe and the savior of mankind. Teach people that the Bible is nothing more than the writings of religious men and must be understood in naturalistic terms only. The supernatural and miraculous are not allowed to be considered literally.
Dr. Hoskier states that the two 19th-century discoveries (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) were not used by Bible believing Christians for over 1,400 years. Not used that is until Westcott and Hort thought that the Word of God was just like any other book (not preserved by God Himself: Psalm 12:6,7) and should be critically examined and “corrected” based on their intellectual scholarship. What arrogance and pride these two godless scholars reveal for all the world to witness.
Unsaved scholars, Westcott and Hort, used these two corrupt and depraved manuscripts almost exclusively to draft a new Greek text for the New Testament. And all new Bible versions use, to a greater or lesser extent, the Greek New Testament drafted by these two unsaved “Christian” scholars. None of their work benefited the body of Christ, but did just the opposite. It created more doubt about the inerrancy, trustworthiness, and authority of the Bible. And that is what they wanted, being sympathetic to the claims of the Roman Catholic Church.
The final point to drive home is that we have over 25,000 newer and more reliable complimentary copies of scripture in multiple languages. So why would translators use two older manuscripts instead of the numerous thousands of other manuscripts that are largely in agreement? (Remember the 90% stability comment in part two?)Might it mean full employment for the professionals, the scholars, and the theologians? Might it have something to do with pride and unbelief? Heaven forbid it has anything to do with making money by selling multiple versions of the Bible, books, and commentaries. For if the Bible continues to evolve based on discoveries, these professional clerics would then occupy positions where only they could decide which Greek or Hebrew rendering is most accurate and what that word means. And that’s an entirely new subject for another day.
Could it be that the older a manuscript is, the less trustworthy it is? That question is unthinkable to most professional scholars and theologians and will elicit a strong reaction. Could it be true?
As mentioned, up until the 16th century, copying the Bible was done by hand. It was costly and time-consuming. Bibles were expensive and only a few owned them. Bibles were written on perishable material that, through constant use, wore out and needed to be replaced. We should not expect to see very old copies because if they were actually good copies, they would have been worn out by constant use. They should not exist. If they do exist (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus), it should set off alarm bells warning us that the manuscript is corrupt and should not be used. And why use just two manuscripts (that disagree with each other over 3,000 times in just the four gospels) to correct 25,000 other manuscripts, which by and large agree with each other? Is this not a highly questionable approach?
But godless scholars such as Westcott, Hort, and others back then and even today, think that they have found a way to dethrone the Bible and make a name for themselves. To set aside the 25,000 manuscripts that are in widespread agreement with each other, and then to use two manuscripts that are supposedly older but disagree with each other in thousands of places, is irrational and irresponsible. It is unbelievably careless because these two manuscripts disagree with each other in thousands of instances. But textual critics of the Bible look for any reasons to cast doubt on the accuracy and authority of the Word of God. Like their father, they say, “Yea, hath God said?”
- Create scientific theories which undermine the historicity and credibility of the Word of God.
In what other ways has the Bible been under attack? Westcott and Hort, like the Roman Catholic Church, did not believe the first three chapters of Genesis were true, literal, or accurate. The Roman Catholic Church has leaders who say that Genesis is a myth. That is not only ignorant, unbelieving, but malicious. A “man of God” flatly denying what the Bible says God did proclaim. Wescott and Hort were strong supporters of Darwin (1859) along with the Roman Catholic Church. Might all of this be an effort to undermine the authority of the Bible and get people to look to the authority of the Pope and church tradition? The connection and inference are undeniable as far as I am concerned.
In the mid-1600s, a Roman Catholic priest named Richard Simon laid the groundwork for doubting the age of the earth and man, when he stated that there was new evidence that the first man dated back to 50,000 years. That meant the Bible’s history was wrong. (This, according to the video authors. I could not verify this using a Google search. He came from a long line of Catholic critics of the Bible, such as Lois Cappel and Johannes Morinus. Some have called him the father of modern Biblical criticism. The founder of Modern Geology, James Hutton, was one other person who published his findings arguing that the Biblical age was wrong. He lived in the 18th Century. Some websites say he was a man of strong Christian faith, while others claim he was a deist at best. Go figure.
In the 20th century, a Jesuit priest and the discoverer who forged the Piltdown Man fraud, led the church and the world in the direction of humanistic evolution and away from Scripture. This was from 1910 to 1912. Forty years later, this earth-shattering discovery of the “missing link” of early man was determined to be a fake. Mr. Charles Dawson, the man who found this fossil, worked with a Catholic priest named Teilhard De Chardin 1881-1955. I didn’t see that information about Chardin’s participation in Wikipedia, and I am not surprised. However, I read about this association with the Jesuit priest before. If you want the specifics check it out for yourself.
Another Catholic priest floated the idea of the unbiblical Big Bang theory in 1931. (I realize that many who claim to be Christian believe in the Big Bang Theory. What I find amazing and depressing is that there is no way to reconcile the Big Bang Theory with scripture. His name was Georges Lemaitre and he is called the Father of the Big Bang theory. He was a Belgian cosmologist and a Catholic priest. The Big Bang theory is still the most widely accepted theory today. Some Christians fit the Big Bang theory into their understanding of the creation story in Genesis. Other Christians believe the Big Bang theory undermines the credibility and authority of the Bible. I am one of them. The Pope of Rome is a believer in evolution and discredits the Genesis account, calling it a myth. What a great defender of the faith and the Bible is the Pope. With friends like that, who needs enemies!
Darwin’s theory of evolution was published in 1859. Originally, the Book title was “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.” The title of his book reveals the inherent racism of the man and the book. Darwin’s theory planted many doubts in Christians’ minds about the accuracy and authority of the Bible, but in particular the creation epic in Genesis. This book, by Darwin, came out in 1859, around the time when Tischendorf discovered Sinaiticus in 1844. Is that a coincidence? All these things came together to destroy credibility in the Bible, according to the authors of this video series and many others. The Pope embraces this Darwinian theory. But maybe you thought the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church were great defenders of the Bible. I wish that were true.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts.
“Having read both the Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Wescott….And the Life and Lectures of Fenton John Anthony Hort…., this author (Dr. Grady, page 214) is firmly convinced that the celebrated Cambridge professors were anything but what they professed to be. It is the central premise of this chapter that Drs. Wescott and Hort were a pair of unsaved liberals with open Vatican sympathies, who cast them as the consummate Jesuit plants.” The Jesuit plan worked very well. I am sure they are thanking Mary for all her help. Later, in another article, we will take up the subject of the Society of Jesus.
Jesus and the Apostles warned about the threat of false prophets, false apostles, and false teachers who would come and deceive those they could and kill many. Jesus and the apostles told the flock to expect false Christs, a false gospel, along with false disciples. What follows is a fundamental timeline of God’s revelation to humanity. If you are a believer in an old earth, as most are, even if you are a Christian, you will disagree with the beginning year of my timeline. If only the Bible is used to calculate the age of the earth, the estimated date below is reasonable. I trust you will find these dates acceptable for the moment. Not everyone agrees with these dates, but they provide an overall outline of how God revealed His will and His Word to mankind over the last 6 thousand years.
Dates
God creates the universe and world, estimated at 4,000 BC
Flood 2,350 BC
Moses receives commandments written by God 1,500 BC
Other written historical books, such as Joshua, Ruth, 1,300 BC
Books of Samuel, Kings, Chronicles
King David’s reign 1010-970 BC
Other writings from God: Job, Psalms, Proverbs, etc
Major Prophets of God: Isaiah 740-680 BC, Jeremiah 627-580 BC
Ezekiel 592-570 BC, Daniel 605-536 BC, and minor prophets
The Northern Kingdom of Israel fell to Assyria 721 BC
Southern Kingdom of Judah falls to Babylon 586 BC
Ezra, Esther, Nehemiah, books 445 BC
God silent for around four hundred years
Jesus Christ was crucified, buried, and rose from the dead AD 33
New Testament books numbering 27 circulated AD 100
The inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God consisted of these books in the Old Testament. 1) the five books of Moses plus history books, 2) the wisdom literature or the writings, and 3) the Prophets, both Major and Minor Prophets of 17 books. A total of 39 books in the Old Testament.
God used eight men to write the New Testament, consisting of 27 books, for a total of 66 books in the Bible. By AD 100, all the books of the Bible were written and being circulated among Christian groups in various nations. Remember that the Roman Catholic Church did not exist for another few hundred years. The Roman Catholic Church dates itself back to Peter, but so do other Christian non-Catholic groups trace their origins back to Jesus and the apostles. What we know of today as the Roman Catholic Church began in the mid-300s under Constantine and not before. Dr. John White argues that the Roman Church we know today dates from the 11th or 12th century. More specifics on this are forthcoming.
- Convince everyone that the Bible is just like any other ancient manuscript. Convince them that the Bible is not the work of an almighty supernatural being who claims to be the creator of the universe and the savior of mankind. Teach people that the Bible is nothing more than the writings of religious men and must be understood in naturalistic terms only. The supernatural and miraculous are not allowed to be considered.
These apostolic scrolls were all gathered together in Antioch of Syria, which was over 300 miles north of Jerusalem. Scrolls were copied, collected, and sent abroad. It was in Antioch that believers were first called Christians. Over the following centuries, the books and epistles of the New Testament canon were determined as discussed previously. This Northern Bible was written in Greek. Protestants and Baptists today date their Bibles back to the Antiochian texts. Baptists claim that they were never part of the Roman Catholic Church like the Reformers were. Other Christian groups make the same claim. Most of these groups were exterminated by the Roman Catholic church over the centuries.
Around the same time, another New Testament Bible was written in the southwest in Alexandria, Egypt. It was also just over 300 miles from Jerusalem. This location had a group of intellectuals who, in the estimation of some Bible scholars over the centuries, including today, perverted the Word of God. You may recall my brief discussion regarding Philo, Clement, and Origen in part 2. How did that happen?
From about 300 BC to 300 AD, Greek was the trade language, and most people spoke it all over the Roman Empire. Intellectuals also debated in Greek, the greatest works of philosophical scholars such as Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Stoics, and Epicureans. All this took place in Alexandria, Egypt. Alexandrian philosophical scholars were known for their hubris, selfishness, and jealousy. It is believed that these prideful scholars corrupted the pure word of God from Antioch in Syria and created their version of the Bible, both Old and New Testaments.
The primary source of these changes came from a “Church Father” named Origen. Because he was a scholar of Greek philosophy and had written around 2,000 books, he was determined to correct the Antiochian scriptures. (Is this the start of textual criticism, which is used today? It is but the Serpent started it in the Garden of Eden with his questioning of and then denial of what God had said.) He thought the Bible needed allegorical exegesis to be understood. He did not believe in miracles in both testaments, he did not believe the Holy Ghost was eternal, and worst of all, he did not believe that Jesus Christ is God Almighty. At times, he would argue both sides of an issue simultaneously, to keep peace with other believers. This man thought his intellectual prowess justified his correcting the Book of God. Pride is deadly. With his allegorical grid of interpretation, Origen took the supernatural out of the Bible. Without the supernatural, we do not have the Word of God.
It is believed that Origen redrafted his own Bible by adding fables in the form of the Apocrypha to the Old Testament and by making other changes to the New Testament. Some of this was done to make his changes appear to be ancient and therefore acceptable. (We will read about a particular Roman Catholic Pope who was known for his school of forgery. Did this too start with Origen?) Origen edited this new Bible, and today it is called the Alexandrian text.
What kind of a man was Origen? Today, it makes no difference whatsoever if a Bible translator or theologian is a godless person as long as that person is a “scholar.” Origen was very intelligent, and he taught others. He was tortured in the Decian persecution of AD 250 and died in AD 254. For many years, Origen was too heretical to be relied on as a “Church Father,” but that changed. Today, he is regarded as a saint by both Catholics and Protestants. Yet many believe he was not a born-again child of God or a real Christian at all. Does it make a difference if a Bible teacher and Bible translator are true Christians? It is not an issue today with many supposedly conservative Christians. In my opinion, anyone who doesn’t think this is a problem is deceived.
Origen’s Bible was copied, like other Bibles, and circulated. In the 300s, Constantine ordered that 50 Bibles be made. Other copies likely continued to be made in Alexandria. Some Christian scholars today believe that the Alexandrian scholars wrote three corrupted Bibles: 1) Sinaiticus in about 350 AD, 2) Vaticanus before 400 AD, and 3) Alexandrinus around 450 AD. These three Bibles disagree with each other in thousands of instances in just the four gospels alone! We will spend some time on this issue later.
There are now different Bibles in existence: the Northern Antiochian and Southern Alexandrian Bibles. The Antiochian tree is the good tree, and it has produced good fruit for thousands of years. The Alexandrian tree is a bad tree with rotten fruit. Yet, despite it being a bad tree, God still saves people who have been deceived into believing in these corrupted Bible translations. I, for one, count myself in this number. My first Bible, before I knew anything about this stuff, was a NAS Bible. Despite its inherent corruptions, God still used it to teach me a great deal and bring me to faith.
Original autographs alone were inerrant.
Another way in which the scholar and/or Bible critics undermine the Word of God’s influence is by insisting that inerrancy and infallibility apply only to the original autographs and not copies. Therefore, today’s Bible critic may talk about Biblical inerrancy. Still, they do not believe in inerrancy because that applies only to the original autograph, and all of those were lost many centuries ago. Did God promise to preserve His word? Psalm 12:6,7. Jesus and the apostles quoted from copies of Old Testament scripture, not the autographs. They believed the copy was just as good as the original autograph.
Suppose inerrancy and inspiration apply only to the original autograph. In that case, we can never know if what we have in any canon of scripture or any translation of the Bible is the complete word of God. We must assume just the opposite and must assume that discoveries will bring forth new light and new truth. We must assume that God did not promise to preserve His word, and we can never be sure we have the real Word of God. The words of the serpent echo from Eden, “Yea, hath God said?” All of this is a damnable doubt on what God has said.
In the following article, Part 4, we will consider some of these early non-Catholic believers in Jesus Christ and the persecution of them by the Roman Catholic Church.
