I have to disagree with the type in bold.One side may seem less charitable in the current climate, but the logical conclusion of each side seems equally offensive to the other: TR folk essentially feel/believe the CT folk are taking away from Scripture, and the CT folk essentially feel/believe the TR folk are adding to it. It's Luke 16:17 vs Revelation 22:18 Perhaps the only peaceable way forward is for each to submit to the rule of their fellowship (and if no rule, then petition for one) and depart from parachurch discussions on this topic. In other words, work it out in your own church body and/or limit such discussions to that sphere - if more needs to be said, let fellowship speak to fellowship instead of individual-to-individual or side-to-side. This topic is different than other discussions because it is foundational to all other beliefs. Just a thought...
Sufficiency of Scripture, inspiration, infallibility—those are foundational to all other beliefs.
A broad or narrow view of God’s providence regarding manuscripts is a completely different category.
Does it not make sense what was happening? Unregenerate men had infiltrated the church, and not only the church, but the inner precincts of scholarship and textual reproduction. The enemy had taken the inner stronghold, and put unholy hands on the written Word of God, to alter it.
Are we circling back to this stuff again?