Zeteo Eurisko said:
“Why do you guys on this blog project such arrogance towards the legitimate questions posed by skeptics? Do you not even recognize that the Bible stating that 800,000 = 1.1 million should raise a query or two? It should be noted that your response is almost all attitude and commentary with very few actual answers to the questions raised. Nonetheless, here is another one: how do you define inerrancy? If you say that the scriptures were inspired in their orignial autographs, what prevents a God who inspires men to write from inspiring men to preserve what was written?”
i) Let’s get real for a moment. Dagood wasn’t asking innocent questions. He wasn’t seeking information.
What he did was to contrive a tendentious multiple-choice exam consisting in a series leading, trick questions designed to make the Bible look bad no matter what answer a Christian examiner selected. The whole thing was rigged.
So let’s not pretend that this was ever about asking innocuous questions to solicit informative answers.
ii) As far as the “arrogant” tone is concerned, in much of my reply my wording was a verbatim reproduction of his very own wording.
So is my tone arrogant, but his tone is not—even though I’m merely reproducing his tone? How does that distinction work, exactly?
iii) But if you’re so concerned about the tone, remember that not all of the T-bloggers assume the same tone.
For example, Jason Engwer is a model of charity. So what do you think of Jason’s replies?
iv) Actually, I gave very direct answers to the major “questions” raised by Dagood.
As to your own question:
a) The inerrancy of the copies has never figured in the inerrancy of Scripture or the traditional doctrine of inspiration.
b) Nothing “prevents” God from inspiring the scribe. But it’s unnecessary. Life is generally governed by ordinary providence.
Our MSS of the OT and NT are quite adequate to the task.