Update: Biblical Inerrancy

 

I recently posted an updated editor's note on an old post here:

[Editor's note:

Since I wrote this article, I came to a different conclusion.  Apparently, 1 John 5:7 does have several Byzantine texts supporting that reading.  See:  First John 5:7.  The article is written by a proponent of the reasoned ecleticism approach to textual criticism.  Notice that he deceptively mentions that only one Byzantine manuscript dating to 1352 A.D. contains the Comma Johanneum "in the text."  But then he acknowledges several other ancient mss where it is included in the margins of the page.  This could happen as a commentary on the text.  That's what the textual critics want you to believe.  But is this a common practice in those mss where it is written in the margins?  No one comments on that aspect of the evidence.  The other possibility is that the scribe accidentally left that part of the verse out and it was written in later in the margins.  Remember that there was no verse numbering at that time yet.  The bottom line here is that the Westminster Confession 1:8 referred to providential preservation of the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus as the original languages that were to settle all matters of faith and practice.  I recommend reading the Reformation Bible Society's position on providential preservation.  February 12, 2025.]

You can read the original article with the editor's note here:  

Biblical Inerrancy, Plenary Verbal Inspiration, and Textual Criticism: Is There an Apparent Contradiction?