Logan
Puritan Board Graduate
Here are a few things I found.
Calvin, as noted earlier, mentions variants and does not reject them on the grounds of minutiae preservation in the text he is using.
Watson, body of divinity says
"Nor has the church of God, in all revolutions and changes, kept the Scripture that it should not be lost only, but that it should not be depraved. The letter of Scripture has been preserved, without any corruption, in the original tongue." But this is in a section talking of the general preservation of Scripture for the church of God throughout all ages, not just in the latter days. So if taken to mean "minutiae" preservation, it proves too much.
Matthew Henry likewise mentions variants and does not reject them on the grounds of minutiae preservation.
Jonathan Edwards put textual critical works in his "Catalogue" and mentions variants in his "Notes". He certainly had a high view of the preservation of Scripture.
Charles Hodge in his commentary on Romans uses other Greek texts aside from the TR of his day, though he clearly believed in the authority of the Scriptures as the perfect rule of faith and obedience and subscribed to the Westminster Confession completely.
A.A. Hodge Commentary on the Confession
Clarifies what he believes the Confession means in chapter 1 by saying "essential purity" of the Scriptures.
Lastly, if the Westminster Divines meant by "kept pure" that it had been transmitted in the minutiae, this also proves too much, because they say it had been "kept pure", not "made pure", and it has been admitted that historically the church may have had the "preserved" word of God, but not the "minutiae preserved" word of God.
I see some people take Owen to believe in minutiae preservation. I will see if I can find quotes from him on this.
Calvin, as noted earlier, mentions variants and does not reject them on the grounds of minutiae preservation in the text he is using.
Watson, body of divinity says
"Nor has the church of God, in all revolutions and changes, kept the Scripture that it should not be lost only, but that it should not be depraved. The letter of Scripture has been preserved, without any corruption, in the original tongue." But this is in a section talking of the general preservation of Scripture for the church of God throughout all ages, not just in the latter days. So if taken to mean "minutiae" preservation, it proves too much.
Matthew Henry likewise mentions variants and does not reject them on the grounds of minutiae preservation.
Jonathan Edwards put textual critical works in his "Catalogue" and mentions variants in his "Notes". He certainly had a high view of the preservation of Scripture.
Charles Hodge in his commentary on Romans uses other Greek texts aside from the TR of his day, though he clearly believed in the authority of the Scriptures as the perfect rule of faith and obedience and subscribed to the Westminster Confession completely.
A.A. Hodge Commentary on the Confession
Clarifies what he believes the Confession means in chapter 1 by saying "essential purity" of the Scriptures.
Lastly, if the Westminster Divines meant by "kept pure" that it had been transmitted in the minutiae, this also proves too much, because they say it had been "kept pure", not "made pure", and it has been admitted that historically the church may have had the "preserved" word of God, but not the "minutiae preserved" word of God.
I see some people take Owen to believe in minutiae preservation. I will see if I can find quotes from him on this.