The Reality of Textual Variants: A Reappraisal of Divine Preservation and the Doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation
Abstract
This thesis surveys major New Testament textual variants, presents manuscript evidence, and reassesses claims that divine preservation requires a single perfect manuscript tradition (commonly advanced as Verbal Plenary Preservation, VPP). While God has indeed preserved His Word providentially, the manuscript tradition demonstrates real, explainable variants. These variants undermine any doctrine that absolutizes one printed edition or manuscript family as the unique locus of divine preservation.
Chapter 1: Introduction
The doctrine of Scripture’s inspiration and preservation is central to Christian theology. Traditional orthodoxy affirms the verbal, plenary inspiration of the autographs (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21). However, in some modern movements, the claim of Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) insists that every word has been preserved perfectly in one manuscript tradition, often tied to the Textus Receptus (TR) or the King James Version (KJV).
This thesis examines textual variants in the New Testament manuscript tradition to evaluate whether VPP is sustainable. Primary case studies include John 1:18, the Pericope Adulterae, the ending of Mark, the Comma Johanneum, and other significant textual divergences.
Chapter 2: Preservation in Biblical and Historical Perspective
2.1 Biblical Witness to Preservation
Scripture teaches that God’s Word endures forever (Ps. 119:89; Isa. 40:8; Matt. 24:35). These texts affirm the abiding authority of God’s revelation but do not specify that preservation occurs in one manuscript or printed edition.
2.2 Historical Transmission of the Text
From the earliest papyri (2nd–3rd centuries) through uncials, minuscules, and lectionaries, the New Testament text exists in thousands of witnesses. The sheer abundance attests to preservation by multiplication and transmission, not to uniformity.
Chapter 3: Case Studies of Significant Textual Variants
3.1 John 1:18 — “Only-begotten Son” vs. “Only-begotten God”
-
Variant: μονογενὴς υἱός (only-begotten Son) vs. μονογενὴς θεός (only-begotten God).
-
Manuscript evidence: Alexandrian witnesses (Codex Sinaiticus [ℵ], Codex Vaticanus [B]) support θεός, while the Byzantine majority and TR favor υἱός.
-
Significance: Demonstrates divergence in early textual tradition with Christological implications.
3.2 The Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11)
-
Absent from early papyri (P66, P75) and Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
-
Present in later manuscripts, sometimes placed in alternative locations.
-
Implication: Its uneven transmission history shows textual fluidity.
3.3 The Ending of Mark (Mark 16:9–20)
-
Omitted in Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
-
Present in the majority Byzantine tradition.
-
Implication: Early divergence regarding Gospel endings.
3.4 The Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7–8)
-
Absent from nearly all early Greek manuscripts; first appears in late Latin tradition.
-
Incorporated into late Greek manuscripts under Latin influence.
-
Implication: Demonstrates how later theological glosses entered transmission.
3.5 Other Variants
-
Romans 8:1: Additional qualifying phrase in some manuscripts.
-
1 Timothy 3:16: “God was manifest in the flesh” vs. “He who was manifest.”
Chapter 4: Evaluating the Doctrine of Verbal Plenary Preservation
4.1 What the Evidence Shows
The manuscript tradition contains thousands of variants. Most are minor (orthographic), but some are theologically significant. This reality undermines claims that one perfect textual line exists.
4.2 Biblical Preservation Reconsidered
Preservation is providential: God ensured His Word was never lost, but not without human scribal variation. The enduring message of Scripture is secure, though no single edition is error-free.
4.3 Problems with VPP and Perfect TR Claims
-
VPP overstates the case by demanding a perfect extant edition.
-
Perfect TR is untenable given the TR’s multiple differing editions.
-
KJV-Onlyism confuses inspiration with translation tradition.
Chapter 5: Pastoral and Theological Implications
-
Confidence in Scripture: The core message of redemption in Christ is securely preserved.
-
Humility in Textual Criticism: Variants invite careful scholarship, not alarm.
-
Unity of the Church: Doctrines like VPP should not divide believers, since they lack biblical warrant.
Chapter 6: Conclusion
The manuscript evidence confirms both the preservation and the variation of Scripture’s text. Divine preservation is real, but not in the mechanical sense claimed by VPP. Instead, God has preserved His Word faithfully across diverse manuscripts, ensuring the gospel’s message remains trustworthy. Therefore, VPP, Perfect TR, and KJV-Onlyism should be rejected as unsustainable theories that distort the doctrine of preservation.
Bibliography
Aland, Kurt, and Barbara Aland. The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989.
Metzger, Bruce M., and Bart D. Ehrman. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Wallace, Daniel B. “The Gospel of John and the Pericope Adulterae.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41, no. 2 (1998): 201–216.
Epp, Eldon J., and Gordon D. Fee. Studies in the Theory and Method of New Testament Textual Criticism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
Parker, D. C. An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and Their Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Comfort, Philip W., and David P. Barrett. The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 2001.