What the word "codex" has meant, changes in inerra

[polonius]

https://bible.org/seriespage/6-bible-inerrant-word-god

“Formerly all that was necessary to affirm one’s belief in full inspiration was the statement, “I believe in the inspiration of the Bible.� But when some did not extend inspiration to the words of the text it became necessary to say, “I believe in the verbal inspiration of the Bible.� To counter the teaching that not all parts of the Bible were inspired, one had to say, “I believe in the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Bible.� Then because some did not want to ascribe total accuracy to the Bible, it was necessary to say, “I believe in the verbal, plenary, infallible, inerrant inspiration of the Bible.� But then “infallible� and “inerrant� began to be limited to matters of faith only rather than also embracing all that the Bible records (including historical facts, genealogies, accounts of Creation, etc.), so it became necessary to add the concept of “unlimited inerrancy.� Each addition to the basic statement arose because of an erroneous teaching.�

Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL, 1987,

“In the course of time, the terms canon and canonical came to be applied to the catalogue or list of sacred books distinguished and honored as belonging to God’s inspired Word. “Greek Christians by the fourth century A.D. had given the word a quasi-technical religious meaning, applying it to the Bible, especially to the Jewish books.�

Merrill F. Unger, Introductory Guide to the Old Testament, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, 1951, p. 47.

[brianbbs67]

I think you bring up a good point. There is much truth in the bible, but there are many obvious additions and translation thru Roman eyes that occurs. Instead of just presenting the words as pasted down. A glaring example is Zechariah 12:10.(there are others, a lot, actually) The Tanakh, which is the source document of the OT(and is in chronological order), has quite a different message than the NKJ. I brought this up in another thread. Just to hopefully have others search and source their beliefs. That is monumentally important. To Most, this is a hard thing. You give up a firmly held belief and replace it with new truth. But, I will say, if you don't allow for your own misunderstanding, you miss more of the truth.

Really, doctrine should be this: God is the creator and enabler. He is good and wants you to choose to be. Then search and explore and find what's true and what is fable. Your doctrine should be locked to good. The stories about your religion should be tested. Poke and prode all you want. Question all. Find truth. BTW, you are never done.

And remember , the scriptures were inspired by God, and then men were inspired by their religion and changed some of them. Quite blatantly. And no one cared or looked or thought.

"generation of vipers, teaching as doctrine the laws of man"