The Inerrant Original and the Human Work of Copying

The New Testament writings were inspired by God through the Holy Spirit, and that inspiration applies to the original writings produced by the apostles and their close associates. Second Timothy 3:16-17 teaches that all Scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness. Second Peter 1:20-21 explains that prophecy did not originate from human will, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. This means that the message God gave through Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, and the writer of Hebrews was accurate, authoritative, and without error in the original text.

The copying of Scripture, however, was performed by human hands. Before printing, every New Testament manuscript had to be copied manually. A scribe sat before an exemplar, which was the manuscript being copied, and produced another copy by sight, hearing, or a combination of both. This work demanded concentration, skill, and reverence, but scribes were still imperfect humans. They misread letters, skipped words, repeated phrases, harmonized passages, corrected grammar, and occasionally introduced changes that were intentional. These changes are called textual variants. A textual variant is a difference among manuscripts at a particular point in the text. A variant is not automatically a doctrinal corruption. Many variants involve spelling, word order, small grammatical differences, or the accidental omission or addition of a word that is easily recognized by comparison with other manuscripts.

This distinction is essential. The original Word of God was pure. The manuscript copies contain copying errors. The existence of copying errors does not mean that the Bible’s message was ruined. Jehovah did not inspire every later copyist in the same way He inspired the biblical authors. The Holy Spirit guided the writing of Scripture, not the daily pen stroke of every later scribe. Yet Jehovah’s Word has not been lost, because the abundance of manuscript evidence allows the original readings to be identified with a very high degree of certainty. The historical-grammatical method begins with the actual wording of the inspired text and seeks the meaning intended by the biblical author under inspiration. Textual study serves that goal by evaluating the evidence so that translators and readers can recover the wording that best represents the original.

Unconscious Errors of the Eye

Unconscious errors are unintentional mistakes made by copyists. The first major kind involves the eye. A scribe could look at one line, copy it, then return to the exemplar and accidentally resume at the wrong place. This happened especially when two nearby lines ended with the same word or similar syllables. The technical term for this is homoeoteleuton, meaning “same ending.” For example, when a sentence contains two clauses ending in the same expression, the eye can jump from the first occurrence to the second, omitting the words between them. The scribe did not intend to shorten the text. His eye simply moved to the wrong point.

A related error is homoeoarchton, which involves similar beginnings. If two clauses begin in a similar way, the copyist can skip from the first beginning to the next. In a manuscript column where the same phrase appears twice, this is easy to understand. A modern reader has experienced the same difficulty when copying a paragraph and accidentally skipping a line because two lines begin with similar words. Such an error is not theological rebellion; it is a human copying slip.

Another eye-related error occurs when letters look alike. In Greek manuscripts written in majuscule script, certain letters could be visually confused. Omicron and theta have similar rounded shapes; lambda and delta can be confused in certain handwriting styles; combinations of letters could look like other combinations when written quickly or closely. The ancient scribe worked with ink, reed pen, parchment, papyrus, and changing lighting conditions. If the exemplar was worn, faded, cramped, or damaged, the chance of visual confusion increased.

These errors are normally identifiable because the resulting reading is shorter, rougher, grammatically awkward, or contradicted by strong manuscript support elsewhere. If one manuscript accidentally omits a line while many earlier and geographically varied manuscripts preserve it, the omission is recognized as secondary. The point is not that every case is instantly obvious, but that the discipline has abundant evidence to compare. The New Testament is not dependent on a single fragile manuscript. It is preserved in thousands of Greek manuscripts, early translations, and quotations by early Christian writers. The very number of witnesses exposes mistakes rather than concealing them.

Unconscious Errors of the Ear and Speech

A second kind of unintentional error involves hearing. In some settings, manuscripts were copied by dictation. One person read aloud while several scribes wrote. When words sounded alike, a scribe could write the wrong word even though the spoken sound was close. Greek had several vowels and diphthongs that came to be pronounced similarly. This phenomenon is called itacism. For example, different Greek vowel combinations could sound alike in later pronunciation, leading to spelling variations that do not change the meaning.

These differences are common and usually minor. A word ending may shift, a vowel may change, or a grammatical form may be spelled in a way that reflects pronunciation rather than strict spelling. English readers see something similar when “there,” “their,” and “they’re” are confused in writing because they sound alike. The meaning can still be recovered from context, but the written form differs. In Greek manuscripts, such differences rarely affect translation. They are counted as variants, but they do not overthrow doctrine, morality, history, or the identity of Christ.

Errors of speech also include the tendency of a scribe to write a familiar form instead of the exact form in the exemplar. If a scribe was accustomed to a common spelling, phrase, or grammatical pattern, he might reproduce that familiar form automatically. This is especially understandable in repeated religious phrases. A copyist who frequently wrote “Jesus Christ” might accidentally write that fuller form where the exemplar read only “Jesus,” or he might reverse the order to match a familiar phrase. The error arose from habit, not from a plan to alter Christian teaching.

The inspired text itself shows that exact wording matters. Jesus based an argument on the tense of a verb in Matthew 22:31-32 when He referred to Jehovah as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Paul reasoned carefully from the singular “offspring” in Galatians 3:16. Because wording matters, textual study matters. Yet the existence of spelling and hearing-related variants does not damage the faith. It demonstrates that the manuscripts are real historical documents copied by real people, and it gives modern scholars a visible trail by which the copying history can be examined.

Unconscious Errors of the Pen and Memory

A third kind of unintentional error involves the pen. A scribe might have the correct reading in mind but write it incorrectly. He could transpose letters, repeat a syllable, omit a small word, or write the same word twice. Dittography is the accidental repetition of letters, syllables, words, or phrases. Haplography is the accidental writing of something once when it should have appeared twice. These errors often arise when similar letters or syllables stand close together.

A scribe might also begin writing one word and then, because another familiar word began the same way, complete the wrong word. He might abbreviate a sacred name in the customary form, known as nomina sacra, but use the wrong abbreviation. In manuscripts, words such as God, Lord, Jesus, Christ, Spirit, Father, Son, and cross were often abbreviated with a line above them. Reverent abbreviation was not itself an error, but the system created places where abbreviations could be misread or expanded incorrectly.

Memory errors are also common in handwritten transmission. A scribe did not always copy one letter at a time. He often looked at a phrase, held it in memory, and then wrote it. During that short movement from eye to memory to hand, a word order could shift. Greek word order is flexible, so a change in order often does not alter the meaning. For example, “Jesus Christ” and “Christ Jesus” can differ in emphasis, but both refer to the same person. Similarly, a conjunction such as “and” or “but” could be omitted or added because the scribe remembered the sense more strongly than the exact sequence of particles.

Memory also explains harmonization between parallel passages. A scribe copying Matthew might remember a familiar wording from Mark or Luke and unconsciously bring Matthew’s wording closer to the parallel account. The Gospels often report the same events with legitimate differences in wording and emphasis. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote under inspiration, and their differences are part of the inspired presentation. When a later scribe made one Gospel read more like another, he was not improving Scripture. He was obscuring the distinct wording chosen by the inspired author. Textual criticism seeks to identify those places and restore the earlier wording.

Errors of Judgment in the Copying Process

A fourth kind of unintentional error involves judgment. A manuscript might contain marginal notes. A reader or scribe could write a clarification, cross-reference, liturgical note, or alternate reading in the margin. A later copyist, seeing the note, might mistake it for words accidentally omitted from the text and insert it into the body of the manuscript. This is one way expansions entered the manuscript tradition.

The Gospel of John contains a well-known example involving John 5:3-4, where some later manuscripts include an explanation about an angel stirring the water. The shorter reading has stronger support, and the longer explanation bears the marks of a later explanatory addition. The narrative in John 5:7 already explains that the sick man believed someone had to enter the water first, so the marginal explanation supplied what later readers thought was needed. The issue is not whether God can heal. The issue is whether those words were part of John’s original Gospel. The manuscript evidence supports their exclusion from the original text.

Another major example is John 7:53–8:11, the account of the woman brought before Jesus. The passage is absent from many early and important witnesses, appears in different locations in some manuscripts, and differs in style from John’s normal writing. The passage contains a memorable moral scene, but textual evidence shows that it was not part of John’s original Gospel. Removing it from the main text does not remove any doctrine taught elsewhere in Scripture. The mercy, justice, and moral purity of Jesus are firmly established in many unquestioned passages, including John 4:1-26, John 8:12, Luke 7:36-50, and Matthew 9:10-13.

Mark 16:9-20 is another example. The earliest reliable form of Mark ends at Mark 16:8. Later endings were added to provide a more rounded close. The resurrection of Jesus does not depend on the longer ending of Mark, because Matthew 28:1-20, Luke 24:1-53, John 20:1-31, John 21:1-25, Acts 1:1-11, and 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 provide strong and repeated testimony to the resurrection. Textual study does not weaken the resurrection. It protects the reader from building doctrine on words not written by the inspired author.

Conscious or Intentional Changes

Conscious changes were intentional alterations made by scribes. Not all intentional changes were malicious. Many were attempts to clarify, smooth, harmonize, or protect what the scribe believed was the correct meaning. A scribe might add a subject where Greek left it implied, replace a rare word with a common one, or alter grammar to make a sentence easier. These actions were wrong because they changed the text, but they were often motivated by reverence rather than hostility.

Harmonization is one of the most common intentional changes. The Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6:9-13 and Luke 11:2-4 appears in different forms because Jesus taught on more than one occasion and because Matthew and Luke wrote with different purposes under inspiration. Later scribes sometimes brought Luke’s shorter form closer to Matthew’s fuller form. Another example appears in Gospel accounts of Jesus’ words on the stake. Scribes familiar with one Gospel sometimes altered another Gospel to align wording. The historical-grammatical interpreter respects each author’s wording and does not flatten inspired differences.

Liturgical expansion also occurred. Words used in public worship could enter manuscripts because they were familiar to congregations. The doxology at the end of Matthew 6:13, often expressed as praise of the kingdom, power, and glory, is absent from the earliest and best witnesses to Matthew’s Gospel. It reflects a reverent liturgical addition, not part of the original text. Christian prayer remains fully grounded in Scripture without it. Matthew 6:9-13 still teaches reverence for Jehovah’s name, submission to His will, dependence on Him for daily needs, forgiveness, and deliverance from evil.

Doctrinally motivated changes also occurred, though they are fewer than critics often claim. The clearest famous example is 1 John 5:7-8 in the form known as the Comma Johanneum, which adds an explicit heavenly witness formula. That longer wording is absent from the Greek manuscript tradition that carries real weight for the original text. The doctrine of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit does not rest on that late addition. The deity of Christ is taught in passages such as John 1:1, John 1:18, John 20:28, Colossians 2:9, Titus 2:13, and Hebrews 1:8. The personality and activity of the Holy Spirit are taught through His role in inspiration, teaching through the Word, and bearing witness in Scripture, as seen in John 14:26, John 16:13, Acts 5:3-4, and 2 Peter 1:20-21.

Why Variants Do Not Destroy the New Testament Message

The number of New Testament variants sounds large because the number of manuscripts is large. If one spelling error occurs in five hundred manuscripts, it can be counted five hundred times. The abundance of variants is directly related to the abundance of witnesses. A work preserved in only one manuscript has no visible variants, but it also has no manuscript comparison. The New Testament has many witnesses, so scribal changes are exposed. The quantity of evidence is a strength, not a weakness.

Most variants are insignificant for translation. Spelling changes, movable letters, word order shifts, and small grammatical differences make up a large portion of the data. A smaller number affect the wording of a sentence. A still smaller number affect the meaning of a passage. No Christian doctrine depends on a disputed reading. The ransom sacrifice of Christ is taught in Matthew 20:28, Mark 10:45, Romans 5:6-11, 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, 1 Peter 2:24, and Revelation 5:9. The resurrection is taught repeatedly in all four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, Peter’s letters, and Revelation. The authority of Scripture is taught in 2 Timothy 3:16-17, 2 Peter 1:20-21, John 10:35, and Matthew 5:18. The coming Kingdom and Christ’s rule are taught in Daniel 2:44, Matthew 6:10, Luke 1:32-33, 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, and Revelation 20:1-6.

The New Testament text is not reconstructed by guesswork. External evidence considers manuscript date, geographical distribution, textual character, and relationship among witnesses. Internal evidence considers authorial style, immediate context, scribal habits, and which reading best explains the rise of the others. A shorter reading is not automatically original, because scribes accidentally omitted text. A harder reading is not automatically original, because scribes also created awkward readings by mistake. Each variant must be weighed carefully.

The Christian has no reason to fear textual study. Truth does not need concealment. If a passage is secondary, honesty requires that it be marked as secondary. Revelation 22:18-19 warns against adding to or taking away from the prophetic words of Revelation. The principle applies broadly: no one has the right to add human words to Scripture or remove inspired words from Scripture. Textual criticism, when practiced reverently and carefully, serves the purity of the text by distinguishing original wording from later copying changes.

Faithful Handling of the Text Today

A faithful Bible reader should understand three truths at the same time. First, Jehovah inspired the original Scriptures through the Holy Spirit. Second, human copyists introduced unintentional and intentional changes in the manuscript tradition. Third, the original wording has not been lost, because the manuscript evidence allows the text to be restored with remarkable accuracy. These truths fit together. They do not contradict one another.

The Christian should avoid two extremes. One extreme denies the reality of scribal errors and treats a later printed form as though it descended untouched from heaven. That view ignores the historical facts of manuscript transmission. The other extreme exaggerates variants and claims that the New Testament message is unknowable. That view ignores the actual character of the variants and the massive agreement among manuscripts. Between these errors stands sober confidence: Jehovah gave His Word, humans copied it imperfectly, and the text remains substantially and doctrinally secure.

Jesus said in John 17:17 that God’s word is truth. He also said in Matthew 24:35 that His words would not pass away. Those statements do not require the claim that every scribe was miraculously preserved from mistake. They require confidence that Jehovah’s revealed truth would not be defeated by human imperfection, Satan’s opposition, or the confusion of a wicked world. The manuscript record bears witness to that fact. The New Testament continues to speak with clarity about Jehovah, Christ, sin, repentance, faith, baptism, obedience, the resurrection, the Kingdom, and eternal life.

You May Also Enjoy

A Christian Skeptic Discovers God In Ancient Israel

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS