Combs: we do not now possess the words of the autographs

William W. Combs of Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary, in an essay titled “The Preservation of Scripture” states:

...it is an incontrovertible fact, obvious to anyone who has examined the manuscript evidence, that we do not now possess the words of the autographs in an absolutely inerrant state. (“The Preservation of Scripture,” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 5, Fall 2000: p. 22)

When I read that statement, it struck me how similar this is to Dan Wallace’s now infamous “We do not have now—in our critical Greek texts or any translations—exactly what the authors of the New Testament wrote” statement. Perhaps it has not been taken as egregiously, since Wallace added, “Even if we did, we would not know it.” It seems to me that so many of these Critical Text supporters are on “the same page” regarding the Bible, whether they are regarded as moderate, conservative, or fundamental.

Combs quotes R. A. Torrey on whether translations are the word of God. Torrey, as these moderns, follows the Warfieldian reasoning about the original autographs, concluding, “The answer is simple; they are the inerrant Word of God just to that extent that they are an accurate rendering of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as originally given, and to all practical intents and purposes they are a thoroughly accurate rendering of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as originally given.” (R. A. Torrey, The Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith, New York, NY: George H. Doran, 1918, pp. 36–37). Nevertheless, it is striking that Torrey seems much more willing to regard them as thoroughly accurate renderings of the originals for all practical intents and purposes. It seems that many with whom we engage today do not see translations as the word of God for all practical practices.