As some of my readers may recall, I was trained as a Christian theologian. That training enabled me to acquire multiple degrees in religious studies from accredited colleges and universities. I state this, not to toot my own horn, but simply to remind the reader that (1) I do know what I am writing about and (2) I do hold degrees in religion, which is more than most televangelists or their associates can say, not to mention many other supposed religious leaders today. Yes, some of them actually hold legitimate degrees, some of which are in religious studies. But very few of them do. Yet many people accept what they say almost without question.

So, these other religious “leaders”, preachers, televangelists, etc. will almost always invariably insist that the Bible is their source of authority on any given subject. And they will insist upon the inerrancy of the Bible – and they mean all of it, not just parts of it. Why do they do this? Simply put, it is an article of faith for most of them. Their denominations teach the inerrancy of the Bible and, if they have any college-level education, they have been trained to accept that. In short, they MUST believe this as an article of faith in most denominations. Therefore, they insist upon this and instruct their flocks to do likewise.

Now, it may come as a shock to some people who do not have any, or who have limited, theological training that their religious “leaders”, whomever they may be, know some or all of the things which I am about to expound here. They have been trained in the history of how the Bible came about just as well as I have been. So, they know most or all of the things I am about to state here, yet they will rarely, if ever, tell you. If that sounds like a recurring theme in my writing, it is. They know, but they literally won’t tell YOU. Yes, they do want YOU to remain uninformed on this manner, as well as a host of others.

Now, I am not going to go into all of the detail I could go into here. It would be too much and would not be necessary in any case. I can easily tell the reader enough to make the point without going into too much detail. If the reader wants more detail on, say, how the Bible was put together over the centuries, that information would be easily found in various places on the internet or in books. It’s too easy to find. That said, I will state a few things in a way that I doubt the reader will find elsewhere.

First, to clarify the subject, the actual “belief”, if you will, is that each book of the Bible is inerrant in its original form and in its original language. Few will go so far as to insinuate that the various translations that we have today are totally inerrant. But some would come disturbingly close to exactly that.

But let’s first deal with original writings. Most people do know that the three languages that the various parts of the Bible were written in were Hebrew, Aramaic (which most state was the language of Jesus himself), and Greek. Therefore, biblical scholars and theologians are required in college or seminary (usually both) to study at least one of these languages, depending upon what their focus may be. And they are expected to become proficient in that language in order to progress in their studies. That already leaves most televangelists in the dustbin because most of them have not done this. Oh, they can take a lexicon and a few other helpful sources and come to basic understandings of the biblical writings, but they are in no way proficient at the level of, say, someone with a PhD in biblical studies. They just aren’t. And, as a matter of full disclosure, I am among those who just aren’t. I struggled mightily with both Greek and Hebrew and managed to pass my classes, but in no way did I become proficient in either. And I didn’t even attempt to take any class in Aramaic. But I repeat this mantra yet again simply to demonstrate the fact that many people will ask some televangelist or one of their associates to explain biblical passages, not truly realizing that they really don’t know the answers. The SBN program, “Frances & Friends” comes to mind. The only “Doctor” they have on the program is Don Paul Gray and, contrary to what most may think, his doctorate is in a subject other than theology.

All that said, one thing that most people today do not seem to realize is that we actually have NO original manuscripts of any of the biblical documents. Not a single fragment of any letter, treatise, book, or sentence has survived from an original writing. Not one! NONE or the original writings have survived the centuries. And, if this even has to be stated, the writings that we do have ARE fragmentary AND are copies made well after the original writings were penned. In addition, what many well-trained biblical scholars don’t even know is that many of these copies have all kinds of notes and extra references written in the margins of said manuscripts, showing that the transcriber sought either to explain something in the margins, or questions something there. And there are examples in which an instructor wrote in the margins, sometimes chiding the student transcriber for making some kind of error. Now, to be fair, such things are found not only among biblical documents, but other ancient documents as well. In short, this was just a common thing to happen. Ancient manuscripts often have all kinds of notes and corrections, etc. in them.

I state all of these things to finally make the point that, even IF the original writings had been so inspired by the Holy Spirit as to be totally inerrant and perfect, they no longer exist. NO ORIGINAL BIBLICAL DOCUMENTS EXIST, NOT A FRAGMENT OR A SINGLE LETTER ON PARCHMENT, PERIOD. And the majority of biblical scholars know that because they have learned that in college and seminary. Of course, that information is in the prefaces to most, if not all, modern Bibles today if people cared to read about it. So, it’s not like they are trying to hide that fact. If someone doesn’t know, it’s because they didn’t bother to read about it. And, believe me, I have listened to people call into “Frances & Friends” asking about exactly this type of thing. This, obviously because the caller never read even the notes in their own Bibles. One has to wonder whether, if someone won’t read the prefaces and the notes, how much they read of the actual Bible itself. Frankly, most questions I hear callers and emailers ask could easily be answered if the person did read their Bibles. But I digress here except to state that the Bible does not have to be inerrant, nor does the reader have to be some expert in one of the ancient languages, for answers to be found within its pages. It’s actually too easy. No one has to ask Frances Swaggart or her panel members anything much. I mean, has any reader seen how they sort-of scramble to answer questions as if they never thought of them before quite often? That’s because they haven’t.

Anyway, the second major point I would like to make here is that IF even the original writings were totally inspired and inerrant in every detail and word, then the writings contained in the Bible today, in their original forms, were the only perfect things in the entire universe! That is, while they still existed. Now, just ponder this for a moment, please. In all of the universe, writings by an assortment of ancient men, most of whom would have been barely educated, if that, somehow turned out to be perfect in every detail. This, because the Holy Spirit ensured that they were. God, who made the entire universe, still made nothing perfect, except these specific writings which humans many, many years later, accepted into a single canon that we today call the Bible. That would literally mean that the only perfect things in the entire universe would be God, the angels that did not rebel (and that is questionable because they still could), and the writings of the Bible. Wow!

People, seriously, if God didn’t make anything else perfect, except MAYBE certain angels, how could the original biblical writings have been perfect? Well, some would say that the earth, for example, WAS perfect before the fall of Adam and Eve, and that they were perfect also prior to that time. Trouble is, the Bible itself does not say that. The book of Genesis states that God saw everything that he had created and that it was “good”, not perfect. Nowhere does even the Bible state that anything God created was perfect. It does state that Satan was “perfect” in all of his ways until iniquity was found within him, but that’s as close as anything in the Bible comes, as far as I can recall. Words that we translate as “perfect” are also used elsewhere, but they also have nothing to do with creation itself. And none of our current biblical writings themselves claim perfection. “Revelation” sort of comes close, but even it doesn’t.

Frankly, even the original writings had to have been imperfect simply because of the fact that fallible man wrote them. I know that most people don’t want to acknowledge that, but it has to be true. Otherwise, one would have to posit that, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, man is indeed able to reach some level of perfection. Sadly, there are some people who would say exactly that. Some churches do actually teach that human beings can live perfect lives after being saved. My own father used to work with someone who constantly harassed him over religious issues such as this. That person truly believed that people could live perfect lives. And, of course, he based this belief on the Bible. My dad eventually got tired of his efforts in this regard, so he asked questions. He said to the man (paraphrasing), so, you believe that a person can be perfect in everything that he or she does, right? The man responded in the affirmative. That’s where my dad already had him! So, he continued with the logical question (again, paraphrasing), so, while a person is doing everything he or she does in a perfect manner, what about all of the things he or she might neglect to do that they ought to have done? Perhaps, in the quest to live a perfect life, one can still neglect to do something that one should have done. Isn’t that imperfection? The man had to back down after that.

And, after all, even the apostle Paul never claimed perfection, for he stated, “the things I hate, those things I do”. Romans 7:15-20 (NASB), “For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good.”

I submit that, with such a confession, the apostle Paul would also readily admit that his own writings were imperfect! Therefore, they are fallible and do contain errors. After all, he was a mere man! It doesn’t matter how inspired he may have been, he was still imperfect himself and, therefore, everything he did was, by definition, imperfect. That would include anything he wrote.

But let’s get back to the original manuscripts themselves. Not only do we not have even a single shred of an original piece of writing, but later writings have gone through many revisions and contain many changes, as any truly good biblical scholar can tell you. Every single piece or fragment of any of the earliest manuscripts that DO still exist have differences, some minor, some not so minor. Scholars, as a general rule, try to accept the oldest manuscripts available. But sometimes it is obvious that even the oldest ones are not as good, and probably not as accurate to the originals, as some later manuscripts. So, they don’t always go with the oldest ones that are still available. Now, it’s complicated how scholars can deduce which manuscripts are the best as opposed to those that are not. But, trust me, most scholars are competent enough to do this with proper training. That having been said, what they come up with is still NOT perfect and is NOT infallible. No competent scholar would ever suggest otherwise.

Now, one really does wish that we had at least some original manuscripts, especially if they were all or mostly intact. I myself would relish that. I would greatly enjoy comparing originals to later revisions. I might even take a stab at learning Greek and Hebrew again if such an opportunity were to present itself. If anyone was ever able to find and prove the existence of even one original, I would do my utmost to examine it myself if it were put out for public consumption. But, alas, such a dream is only illusory. I’m not going to state without any reservation that such a document can never be found. But I am going to state that it isn’t going to happen. It just isn’t. They simply do not exist anymore, period.

But this actually brings us to the next problem and to the next major point I have to make here. One really has to question this; if God, through the Holy Spirit, somehow ensured that the original writings, copies of which are in today’s Bibles, were perfect and inerrant, why would God not also have ensured that these perfect documents survive to this day so that no one could dispute what they may or may not have said? In short, why did God go to all that effort just to allow his perfect documents to become lost over time? If it was important enough to create perfection, why let it ever be destroyed? Is it, somehow, that perfection can’t exist in an imperfect world? Well, perhaps that last question is too philosophical, after all. So, we won’t go any further down that road here. The real point, however, is that it really doesn’t make much sense for God to have ensured that certain writings were perfect and infallible only to allow said writings to be destroyed.

The fact that they no longer exist is the main cause of confusion and argumentation concerning the Bible in general and the individual texts otherwise. But frankly, people would argue anyway. They don’t need the originals to prevent that. Even if we had them, some people would argue over what they said. Trust me.

So, let’s be real here. The fact of the matter is that (1) we don’t have any original writings and (2) even if we did, they would contain errors because of human input, and (3) the copies that we do have contain even more errors than the originals would have contained. The original writings were NOT perfect, and our present Bible, no matter which version is used, is also NOT perfect.

How many non-theologians or people who are not biblical scholars know much at all about the process of the formation of the Bible in the first place? The debates as to which books to accept, and which to reject, would make some of our present political debates look like child’s play. Frankly, it’s a wonder that people ever finally agreed to an actual canon. And, even more frankly, they really didn’t! Certain combinations of books have been accepted over the centuries by various different groups for their own purposes. And that has been the case from the very inception of any attempt to create a Bible. Some Bibles had more books than others, in so many words. Some Bibles had this book, while another one wouldn’t, but might contain others. So, frankly, even to this day there is no complete agreement even as to which books properly constitute the Bible.

But let’s just take the Bible that most Protestant churches accept. They will state that THOSE books were inspired, while any other book not contained in their Bibles was not. THOSE books were (are) perfect and without error. Thus, they are inerrant. And Protestant churches base their entire creeds, dogmas, and articles of faith on THAT particular book. It is an article of faith that a person MUST accept all of the books of the Bible – their Bible – as inerrant as a matter of salvation. And they would be shocked at any suggestion that, if the originals might have been inerrant, the copies and translations can’t be! But that is exactly the final crux of the matter.

So, for my final major point I must point out that there actually are some denominations that insist that the King James Version of the bible is every bit as inspired and inerrant as any original must have been. Otherwise, their faith could be called into question. This simply because, whatever they may say, their entire faith is placed solely and completely in a BOOK! Thus, they literally HAVE to believe without reservation ludicrous stories like Noah’s flood and ark, as well as a whole host of others.

The worst part of it is the fact that they really do believe that the original KJV was and is infallible and perfect. Never mind that literally NONE of them even read the original KJV because it was written in very Old English which almost no one CAN even read today. The versions that we have today are NOT the original! Changes have been made so that we CAN read it. Oh, but those changes don’t cause any errors, they will say. Be that as it may (or may not), it is strictly ludicrous to posit that God somehow made sure that original writings were inerrant but allowed them to be lost and further allowed a whole host of errors to creep into all later manuscripts until the King James translation was made, which he somehow ensured would also be inerrant and perfect! And, on top of that, God has ensured that each change made to the KJV was perfect and without error too! I’m not quite sure why God would choose English as the language of choice here. What about all the other translations made in German, etc.? Are they not also inspired and without error? And there is little use in getting into other English translations because, in this scenario, they simply MUST contain errors. This because God would surely never allow different translations of the same language to be inerrant. One has to be perfect, while all others must be imperfect. If anyone reads this and doesn’t see how crazy that is, I really don’t know what to say further.

In the end, many, many Christians, especially conservative evangelical Protestants, have succumbed to actually making their Bible into an idol! It’s really that simple. A single book is their real focus – not Jesus, not God, not the things Jesus actually taught according to the very Bible they worship…. They would hiss at any Pagan, calling statues of the deities “idols”, while they have their own idol! It’s sad, but all too true.