Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
The New Testament, an integral part of the Christian Bible, has been handed down over centuries through a process of transmission. This process was a meticulous one, largely done by hand, and is thus susceptible to various kinds of errors introduced by scribes. These errors, though unintentional, can have an impact on our understanding of the original message, but they do not compromise the overall message of the New Testament.
The transmission of the New Testament texts involved copying and recopying of manuscripts by scribes across generations. This was an intricate task requiring both skill and concentration. The earliest copies of the New Testament were written on papyrus, then later on parchment, both of which are organic materials subject to deterioration over time. As a result, no original manuscripts (autographs) of the New Testament books survive today.
Despite this, we have a wealth of ancient copies or fragments of copies, called manuscripts, which provide an abundant textual tradition for comparison and study. By examining these thousands of manuscripts, scholars have been able to piece together the original text with a high degree of confidence. However, due to human error, various types of scribal mistakes have entered the text during this transmission process.
One common type of error is a “slip of the pen,” known as a haplography. A scribe might unintentionally skip a word, a line, or even a whole section of text. For instance, in 1 Thessalonians 2:7 (ESV), some manuscripts have the word “gentle” whereas others have “babies.” The Greek words for “gentle” and “babies” are quite similar, leading to the conjecture that a scribe might have misread or miscopied the word.
Another type of error is dittography, which is the unintended repetition of letters, words, or phrases by a scribe. An example of this is found in 1 John 1:4 (ESV), where some manuscripts read “these things we write” while others read “these things we write to you.” The additional “to you” in some manuscripts is likely due to a scribe’s inadvertent repetition.
Errors of homoioteleuton are also common. This term refers to instances when two lines end similarly, leading the scribe to skip from one line to the next, unintentionally omitting the intermediate text. In the case of Romans 8:12 (ESV), some early manuscripts lack the phrase “to live according to the flesh,” possibly due to homoioteleuton.
Despite the inevitability of such scribal errors, it’s crucial to note that these discrepancies are usually minor and do not significantly alter the core theological teachings of the New Testament. The process of textual criticism has been invaluable in identifying and rectifying these mistakes, thereby aiding in our pursuit of the most accurate rendering of the original text.
Textual critics utilize principles such as lectio difficilior potior (the more difficult reading is the stronger) and lectio brevior potior (the shorter reading is the stronger) to evaluate variant readings. They also consider the manuscript evidence – the age, geographical distribution, and textual family of the manuscripts that carry a particular reading.
Given this, the study of scribal errors serves not as an indictment against the trustworthiness of the New Testament but rather as a testament to the scrupulous care and devotion of the early Christian community in preserving and restoring the words of the New Testament. Despite the human element, it has not been left to chaos or uncertainty.
The accuracy and integrity of the current New Testament text are not the result of a miraculous event, as some King James Version Onlyists (KJVO) assert. Instead, the painstaking work of textual scholars and the diligent efforts of copyists over the centuries have contributed to the preservation and restoration of the New Testament.
The transmission of the New Testament is a testament to the countless scribes who meticulously copied the manuscripts, often under challenging circumstances. These dedicated individuals played an instrumental role in preserving the Scriptures for future generations. Despite the inherent risk of scribal errors, their work has been remarkable in maintaining the essential content of the texts.
Building on this foundation, textual scholars such as J. J. Griesbach, Karl Lachmann, Konstantin von Tischendorf, B. F. Westcott, F. J. A. Hort, Eberhard Nestle, Kurt and Barbara Aland, and Bruce M. Metzger have laboriously compared and evaluated thousands of manuscripts. Their meticulous work has significantly contributed to reconciling variances, determining the most probable original readings, and restoring the New Testament text with impressive accuracy.
Therefore, while it’s true that scribal errors do exist in the transmission process, the tireless work of textual critics has ensured that we have a New Testament that very closely aligns with the original writings. The claim that the New Testament was miraculously restored overlooks the profound and rigorous work done by generations of scholars and scribes, whose commitment to preserving and restoring the text provides us with a reliable and accurate New Testament today.
Furthermore, the wealth of manuscript evidence for the New Testament far surpasses any other ancient text. We possess over 5,800+ Greek New Testament manuscripts, in addition to thousands more in Latin and other ancient languages. To put this in perspective, the Iliad by Homer, one of the most famous works of ancient Greece, survives in around 1,800 manuscripts, none of which are originals.
When discrepancies arise, they often reside in minor details, not in major doctrinal matters. An example of this is Mark 1:2-3 (ESV). Some early manuscripts read “As it is written in Isaiah the prophet,” while others have “As it is written in the prophets.” The difference, while real, does not affect Christian doctrine; both versions affirm the fulfillment of prophecy in the ministry of John the Baptist.
Christian apologists and even some text scholars love to say, “While scribal errors in the transmission of the New Testament do exist, their impact does not detract from the integrity of the message conveyed.” This is absolutely true, but sadly, they stop there. While this is true, they always omit the most important fact. They really need to incorporate what I am about to say into their data because they seldom mention these facts.
They have not fully captured the full scope of the meticulous work that textual scholars have done. The laborious efforts by renowned scholars such as J. J. Griesbach, Karl Lachmann, Konstantin von Tischendorf, B. F. Westcott, F. J. A. Hort, Eberhard Nestle, Kurt and Barbara Aland, and Bruce M. Metzger indeed have significantly contributed to restoring the New Testament text to its original form.
In the course of their work spanning over 450 years, these textual critics have striven to reconcile the various manuscript discrepancies, bringing us closer to the original autographs than ever before. For example, the 1881 edition of the Greek New Testament by Westcott and Hort reflects an impressive degree of accuracy, with an agreement of 99.5% to the 2012 28th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament.
Moreover, the discovery of the papyri in the 20th century validated and reinforced these scholars’ rigorous work, underscoring the accuracy of Westcott and Hort’s earlier endeavors. With the combination of the Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament and the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, we have, as you rightly pointed out, a New Testament text that has been restored to a remarkable 99.99%.
It is essential to understand, then, that while scribal errors do exist in the transmission of the New Testament, they in no way detract from the integrity of the message conveyed. In fact, thanks to the meticulous scholarship of numerous individuals dedicated to textual criticism, we can be confident that the New Testament we have today very closely mirrors the original writings.