I - an atheist - am morally better than the Christian God

[Sparko]

That's what I said and which you disagreed with. It's purpose is to try to reconstruct the original texts using later texts.

You just like to disagree, doncha?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

That's what I said and which you disagreed with. It's purpose is to try to reconstruct the original texts using later texts.

You just like to disagree, doncha?

I disagreed with your conviction "But we can use textual criticism to reconstruct what the autographs said to a high degree of certainty.".

As I pointed out "There is a degree of probability, which is by no means the same thing."

You now appear to be concurring with my position on this matter.

[Sparko]

I disagreed with your conviction "But we can use textual criticism to reconstruct what the autographs said to a high degree of certainty.".

in the case of the NT, that is the case. We can be very sure of what the autographs said to 90%+ (some say 99%+)

[Tassman]

in the case of the NT, that is the case. We can be very sure of what the autographs said to 90%+ (some say 99%+)

So, which !0% of the NT do inerrancists acknowledge to be not necessarily inerrant?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

in the case of the NT, that is the case. We can be very sure of what the autographs said to 90%+ (some say 99%+)

There is a degree of probability.

[Sparko]

So, which !0% of the NT do inerrancists acknowledge to be not necessarily inerrant?

Inerrancy is held only in the autographs, not the copies.

[37818]

New Testament textual criticism is an interesting topic. And not agreed on. Two things to note, the souce New Testament documents have more copies of them than any other ancient documents. And secondly among those docuements they have common readings of texts where they are largely the same. The disagreements are over the variant readings as to which ones are the original readings and how that is to be decided.

[Tassman]

Inerrant is held only in the autographs, not the copies.

There are no original "autographs", so obviously "inerrancy" cannot apply.