The inspiration, infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible is the most significant authoritative claim, along with the resurrection of Christ, of the exclusive claim of the Christian faith. And even though the resurrection of Christ can be proven evidentially, with out the truthful message of the Bible we couldn’t know or understand the actual meaning of that event.
So the skeptics, those in rebellion from God, continually attempt to disprove the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. These attacks come from many directions.
One of these attacks focuses on the question how do we know the Bible is using the correct texts for translation. After all, every scholar agrees that we do not have the originals.
Muslims, Mormons and popular liberal scholars like Bart Ehrman claim that since all we have are manuscripts with errors, we can’t be sure the transmission leads to a correct translation. This apparently gives ammunition to those who hold to the idea that God preserved the correct manuscript for the King James only translation.
This Areopagus Journal makes the case from using the science of textual criticism that we have virtually the original text. Also covered are the reasons why a few passages are considered questionable such as Mark 16:9-20, and the fallacies of the King James only movement.
This journal presents crucial information on
the issue of the topic distilled by the authors
as an alternative for those without the time or
the inclination to read numerous books on the topic.