Why didn't God preserve the originals?

@RandalRauserQuestion for inerrantists: If God would assure that his revealed text would be without error, why wouldn't he ensure either that subsequent copies of that texts would be without error and/or that the original copies (autographa) of the texts would be preserved through all time?

Oh Gosh. Progressive theologian reheating Ehrman's stale objection to inerrancy. Pity the fried maggots when Rauser pops his rotten meat into the microwave. 

1. The question is ironic because, even though Rauser thinks the Bible teaches moral and factual falsehoods, he pretends to believe in Biblical inerrancy. He has an "appropriation" model of inspiration which drives a wedge between God's intentions and the intentions of the Bible writers. He treats the books of the Bible as a collection of error-ridden writings, but the collection is "inspired" and "inerrant" because it somehow serves God's overarching purpose. So Rauser's objection to inerrancy, which he camouflages as a question, contradicts his "cross my fingers behind my back" affirmation of inerrancy. 

2. It's a speculative question, so only speculative answers are available. A plausible reason God didn't preserve the originals is because they'd become trophies in the cult of relicts. Religious wars would be fought to keep or capture the originals. They'd be venerated with superstitious awe as talismans.

3. As for why inerrancy doesn't extend to copies, God made a kind of world where there's an interplay between natural and supernatural factors, miracle and providence. On the one hand, everything that happens is not a continuous series of miracles. On the other hand, everything that happens is not closed continuum. The physical world operates much like a machine. But natural processes can be circumvented by spiritual agency. 

If, on the one hand, if every event was a miracle, life would have no stability or predictability. Life would have no continuity. Human experience would be radically disjointed. There'd be no presumption that the same antecedent conditions yield the same outcome. Any kind of future could fork off from the same past–at any time, all the time. That would be literally nightmarish. Scenes abruptly and constantly changing. 

On the other hand, we're not trapped in a clockwork universe where prayer can't reach. The machinery has a manual override. Spiritual agents or agents with spiritual power can bypass physical cause and effect. God struck a balance between a closed system and chaos. 

4. Regarding the textual transmission of the Bible, God hasn't done more than is necessary. Inerrant copies are inessential to preserve the message. For one thing, biblical teaching is redundant. It doesn't teeter on a particular reading of a particular verse. 

In addition, most scribal errors are trivial, recognizable, and correctible. If natural ability will suffice, then supernatural empowerment is unnecessary. 

5. In theory, God could use direct, private revelation for every individual. But human beings are social creatures by divine design. The Christian faith has a corporate life in the fellowship of the church. Having a public revelation as a common a frame of reference unites Christians. Yes, there's a sense in which the Bible can be theologically divisive, but even then we disagree about the same thing. We share a common struggle. We debate each other. We're not cubicle people.