Reason 4 refuted: The psychological power of contradiction lists outweighs their actual evidential force; contradictions would not disprove inspiration anyway

The skeptic links to the Skeptic's Annotated Bible list of hundreds of alleged biblical contradictions.

Q&A: Is the Bible's text perfectly preserved like Muslims claim about the Quran?

Viewer question about textual preservation and inerrancy.

Q&A: The pericope adulterae (John 7:53–8:11, woman caught in adultery) was likely not in the original Gospel of John

Viewer asks about the scholarly conclusion that the 'cast the first stone' story is a later addition.

The Bible is supported by thousands of manuscripts. Comparing them reveals only minor variations — spelling differences, word order — not substantive theological changes. A reader can trust modern John 1 reflects what was originally written.

Recommendation: Mike has a three-video playlist on translations and complex textual issues related to the Bible, covering topics like the longer ending of Mark and textual variants

Answer to 'The Real Effects' about where to find more on Mark and Scripture authority

Q&A: Malachi 1:11 — "Gentile" and "heathen" as translation variants; the verse prophesies universal worship

Brief textual note on translation choices in Malachi

Textual variants and extra verses in modern translations do not undermine inerrancy or preservation — they represent more, not less

Q18 from Chris Levy: How do we reconcile inerrancy and preservation when modern translations say verses have been added (e.g., ending of Mark, Acts 8:37)?