Balancing Skepticism and Faith in Textual Scholarship

Introduction

“Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism,” edited by Elijah Hixson and Peter J. Gurry, is an ambitious attempt to provide a corrective to longstanding misconceptions about the textual history of the New Testament. With contributions from various scholars, this book tackles myths propagated by apologists and skeptics alike, aiming to present a nuanced and updated understanding of the field. Despite its wealth of information and valuable insights, the book leans heavily into an agnostic tone about certainty in textual criticism, which may leave Christian readers questioning its approach to the confidence they can place in the New Testament’s reliability.

---

Analysis of Skepticism and Uncertainty

The overarching theme of the book is a tempered skepticism, reflecting a shift in modern scholarship toward embracing ambiguity. While this approach may appeal to academic audiences who value cautious conclusions, it risks alienating readers seeking assurance about the integrity of the New Testament text. Daniel B. Wallace, in the foreword, articulates this mindset, stating, “We do not have now…exactly what the authors of the New Testament wrote. Even if we did, we would not know it.”​ While Wallace’s intent may be to highlight scholarly humility, such statements mirror arguments found in Bart D. Ehrman’s works, such as Misquoting Jesus, which emphasize uncertainty to undermine confidence in the New Testament.

Daniel B. Wallace writes:

“The new generation of evangelical scholars is far more comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty than previous generations. They know the difference between core beliefs and those that are more peripheral. They recognize that even if we embrace the concept of absolute truth, absolute certainty about it is a different matter.”​.

The book’s treatment of the dating of manuscripts, particularly P52, exemplifies this skeptical trend. The reassessment of P52’s dating—a fragment traditionally placed between 110–150 C.E.—to a broader range into the third century, raises questions about the evidence justifying such a shift. Daniel Wallace himself seems inconsistent in his public presentations and academic publications on this issue. This inconsistency reinforces the perception that textual scholars sometimes overstate uncertainties unnecessarily, a tendency that can undermine faith-based apologetics.

---

Critique of the Treatment of Apologists

One strength of the book is its critique of outdated arguments from Christian apologists. It rightly points out that many apologetic works rely on recycled data and flawed methodologies. For instance, the book challenges misrepresentations of the number of textual variants or manuscripts used to demonstrate the reliability of the New Testament. However, the book’s sharp rebuke of apologists often fails to acknowledge the crucial role they play in defending the faith against widespread skepticism. While some apologists may err in their use of evidence, the solution is better education, not dismissiveness toward their efforts.

---

Redating P52 and the Skeptical Slant

The redating of P52 is perhaps the most contentious issue. The book’s decision to lend credence to later dating for this manuscript without strong supporting evidence reflects a broader pattern in contemporary textual criticism: the preference for doubt over confidence. The re-daters of P52 fail to address adequately the counterarguments presented by scholars who maintain an earlier date. My work, The P52 Project, addresses this issue with clarity, emphasizing that the early dating of P52 aligns well with historical and paleographic data. In contrast, the agnostic posture of Myths and Mistakes risks creating the impression that uncertainty is a virtue in textual criticism rather than a temporary stance pending further evidence.

---

Comparison to Bart D. Ehrman’s Approach

While Myths and Mistakes distances itself from Ehrman’s more radical skepticism, the resemblance in tone is notable. Parts of the book could easily be mistaken for an Ehrmanian critique of the New Testament’s textual integrity. This is particularly troubling given the editors’ stated commitment to affirming the reliability of the New Testament. The insistence on highlighting uncertainties, rather than affirming the overwhelming evidence for the text’s reliability, creates an impression of a “glass half-empty” approach to textual criticism.

---

Value for Christian Scholars and Apologists

Despite its flaws, Myths and Mistakes is a worthwhile resource for those interested in New Testament textual criticism. The chapters on scribal practices, textual variants, and the transmission history of specific New Testament books provide valuable insights. The book’s emphasis on rigorous methodology and updated bibliographical data equips readers with tools to engage more responsibly with textual issues. However, readers must approach the book with discernment, recognizing its skeptical undercurrent.

For Christian apologists, the book serves as a reminder to ground arguments in careful scholarship. Yet, the editors’ preference for ambiguity over confidence is not an approach that most Christians find satisfying. Textual evidence overwhelmingly supports the reliability of the New Testament, and there is no need to overemphasize uncertainties at the expense of this fact.

---

Conclusion

Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism is a valuable yet flawed contribution to the field. While it successfully addresses misconceptions and advances scholarly discussion, its agnostic tone regarding certainty detracts from its usefulness for faith-based audiences. Readers should supplement this book with works like my own, The P52 Project, MISREPRESENTING JESUS: Debunking Bart D. Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus”, THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: A Beginners Handbook to New Testament Textual Studies, THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: The Resource for Pastors, Teachers, and Believers, to gain a balanced perspective on the reliability of the New Testament text. The central truths of Christianity remain clear and unshaken, even in the face of textual variants and scholarly debate.

You May Also Enjoy

How Are Digital Advancements Transforming New Testament Textual Criticism?

About the Author

Online Guided Bible Study Courses

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION