Textual criticism is deeply fundamentally church history, yet it also presents an enduring challenge for the church. How can the church assert that it is founded upon the Scriptures while simultaneously engaging in the process of establishing the Scriptures themselves? This apparent paradox has been central to both orthodoxy and orthopraxy since the earliest days of the post-resurrection church. In the post-19th-century era, the church was compelled to clarify its doctrinal positions regarding the authority, inspiration, and (in)fallibility of Scripture. Many confessionally oriented churches today adhere to formulations similar to the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy to articulate their views on inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility—principles also affirmed by the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) as its doctrinal foundation.
However, recent developments have introduced new conceptual, terminological, and epistemic challenges. A critical issue emerges in Article X of the Chicago Statement, which asserts that inspiration “applies only to the autographic text.” Historically, most biblical studies scholars have generally accepted this claim, given that modern textual criticism has provided significant clarity, if not certainty, in reconstructing the original text. Yet, many of those scholars are unaware that New Testament textual criticism scholars have largely abandoned both the term and concept of the “original text” over the past two decades. Some even argue that the notion of an original text is ambiguous, misleading, or altogether untenable. This raises a fundamental question: What value does a doctrinal statement on the inerrancy of the autographic text hold if scholars no longer believe such a text can be definitively identified?
The challenge for traditional creedal formulations is that forthcoming editions of the critical New Testament text will not purport to have recovered or reconstructed the original text. Rather, the printed text is only an approximation of the earliest recoverable textual edition from which later forms descend.
This paper addresses the intersection between traditional conceptions of the original text and the prevailing scholarly emphasis on the Ausgangstext. It will explore three key areas: (1) why this issue extends beyond mere terminology and reflects a broader shift in textual criticism, (2) the theological and creedal implications of this shift, and (3) pathways forward for biblical studies to navigate this evolving landscape.