Have the Hebrew and Greek documents we now have, which
form the basis of our English translations, been faithfully transmitted from the
time when they were first written or have they been significantly changed and
edited since that time?
The Christian faith is dependent on the Bible being a
faithful witness to the inspired writings of the prophets and apostles. Even if we concede that these prophets and
apostles were inspired to write original documents can a reasonable person
believe that these documents have been faithfully transmitted thousands of
years? Until 1439 with the
invention of the printing press the transmission of the text relied upon hand
written copies and at times oral tradition, then how sure can we be that the
revelation, once given to God’s people through prophets and apostles has been
preserved?
This is a critical question, since without a text
largely transmitted effectively then we could not depend on our current text to
be an accurate representation of this revelation. This
would undermine our ability to speak with confidence about what God has
revealed about HIS purpose and plan through the Bible.
What are the texts we have today?
Hebrew Bible
The Masoretic Text – Hebrew Text of the entire Hebrew
Canon from the 10th Century AD
The Dead Sea Scrolls – The book of Isaiah and
fragments from most of the books of the Hebrew Canon from 100 BC.
The Septuagint – Greek translation from the Hebrew from 200 BC
Greek Bible
There are over 5000 Greek manuscripts.[1]
1. Oldest Fragments –
date back to 100 AD with one fragment of Mark now thought to come from the
first century.[2]
2. Older Papyrii – These range from 100 AD to 200 AD and about
45% of the entire New Testament can be reconstructed from these manuscripts.
3. Codex Vaticanus and
Codex Siniaticus – Complete Greek New Testaments dated around 350 and 400 BC
4. Translations – in
Syria , Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and Ethiopic, as well as the Latin Vulgate,
with some translations as early as the late 2nd to fourth century
A.D.
5. The Church fathers quote
the Greek bible often. They write from
100 A.D. to 450 A.D. The entire New
Testament could be reconstructed out the writings of the Church fathers.
The science of Textual Criticism – Restoring the Original Work
It is the job of the scholar of textual criticism to take these
manuscripts and use them to reconstruct as much as possible the original
text. This is explained by Dr. Metzger:
“The method of textual
criticism which has been generally practised by editors of classical Greek and
Latin texts involves two main processes, recension and emendation. Recension is
the selection, after examination of all available material, of the most
trustworthy evidence on which to base a text. Emendation is the attempt to
eliminate the errors which are found even in the best manuscripts.
The application of critical
methods in the editing of classical texts was developed principally by three
German scholars, Friedrich Wolf (1759-1824), one of the founders of classical
philology, Immanuel Bekker (1785-1871), and Karl Lachmann (1793-1851). Bekker
devoted his long life to the preparation of critical editions of Greek texts.
Bekker collated some 400 manuscripts, grouped existing manuscripts of an author
into families where one was derived from another, and published sixty volumes
of improved editions of Greek authors. Lachmann went further than Bekker,
showing how, by comparison of manuscripts, it is possible to draw inferences as
to their lost ancestors or archetypes, their condition, and even their
pagination.
The basic principle which
underlies the process of constructing a stemma, or family tree, of manuscripts
is that, apart from accident,
identity of reading implies identity of origin. Often, however,
difficulties hinder the construction of a stemma of manuscripts. A disturbing
element enters when mixture has occurred, that is, when a copyist has had two
or more manuscripts before him and has followed sometimes one, sometimes the
other; or, as sometimes happened, when a scribe copied a manuscript from one
exemplar and corrected it against another. To the extent that manuscripts have
a "mixed" ancestry, the genealogical relations among them become
progressively more complex and obscure to the investigator.”[3]
Metzger, The Text of the New Testament,
pp. 156-159.
Due to this science of
reconstructing ancient manuscripts the church today can be more sure that the
Hebrew and Greek texts have been examined and studied in such a way that they
represent the original writing as much as is humanly possible to reconstruct. There is good reason to believe that based on
this study of these documents that we have before us a very accurate version of
what was originally written.
This same method has been
used on other ancient documents.
However, the Bible and especially the New Testament gives us copies of
the original that are earlier and in greater number than any other ancient
writings. If we cannot trust the New
Testament to represent the originals accurately then we would have to lose all
the manuscripts that tell us about the ancient world. Only intellectual prejudice would make us
use a higher standard for Biblical documents than we use for other ancient
writings.
The following chart can give
us an idea of how strong the evidence is for the New Testament.
THE HISTORICITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AGAINST
OTHER TEXTS OF ANTIQUITY
OTHER TEXTS OF ANTIQUITY
ANCIENT DOCUMENT
|
ORIGINAL
|
EARLIEST COPY
|
TIME SPAN
|
# OF COPIES
|
New Testament
|
40-100 A.D.
|
125 A.D.
|
25
|
5,686*
|
Homer
|
900 B.C.
|
400 B.C.
|
500
|
643
|
Pliny
|
61-113 A.D.
|
850 A.D.
|
750
|
7
|
Suetonius
|
75-160 A.D.
|
950 A.D.
|
800
|
8
|
Tacitus
|
100 A.D.
|
1000 A.D.
|
900
|
1
|
Caesar
|
100-44 B.C.
|
900 A.D.
|
1000
|
10
|
Tacitus
|
100 A.D.
|
1100 A.D.
|
1000
|
5
|
Lucretius
|
53 B.C.
|
1153 A.D.
|
1100
|
2
|
Aristophanes
|
450-385 B.C.
|
900 A.D.
|
1200
|
10
|
Plato
|
427-347 B.C.
|
1100 A.D.
|
1200
|
7
|
Demosthenes
|
383-322 B.C.
|
900 A.D.
|
1300
|
200
|
Thucydides
|
460-400 B.C.
|
900 A.D.
|
1300
|
8
|
Herodotus
|
480-425 B.C.
|
1100 A.D.
|
1300
|
8
|
Aristotle
|
384-322 B.C.
|
1000 A.D
|
1400
|
49
|
Sophocles
|
496-406 B.C.
|
1100 A.D.
|
1400
|
193
|
Euripides
|
480-406 B.C.
|
1100 A.D.
|
1500
|
9
|
Catullus
|
54 B.C.
|
1550 A.D.
|
1600
|
3
|
Livy
|
59 B.C. – 17 A.D.
|
400 A.D.
|
400
|
20
|
The reason this is significant is pointed out by Dr. Charles L. Quarles.
"The fact that the New Testament writers were decent, moral men who penned their testimonies of Jesus only a few decades after the events to which they refer and the fact that abundant manuscript evidence has enabled modern scholars to restore the original text of these documents with a very high degree of accuracy, should demand that historians at least treat these documents with the level of credibility granted these other sources."
(2013-07-01). In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetic for the Authority of Scripture (Kindle Locations 1875-1878). B&H Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.)
Other reasons to believe the text has been preserved with integrity.
1. The
Hebrew scribes went to great length to preserve the accuracy of the text.
ü
“They could
only use clean animal skins, both to write on, and even to bind manuscripts.
ü
Each column
of writing could have no less than forty-eight, and no more than sixty lines.
ü
The ink must
be black, and of a special recipe.
ü
They must
verbalize each word aloud while they were writing.
ü
They must
wipe the pen and wash their entire bodies before writing the word
"Yahweh," every time they wrote it.
ü
There must
be a review within thirty days, and if as many as three pages required
corrections, the entire manuscript had to be redone.
ü
The letters,
words, and paragraphs had to be counted, and the document became invalid if two
letters touched each other. The middle paragraph, word and letter must
correspond to those of the original document.
ü
The
documents could be stored only in sacred places (synagogues, etc).
ü
As no
document containing God's Word could be destroyed, they were stored, or buried,
in a genizah - a Hebrew term meaning "hiding place." These were
usually kept in a synagogue or sometimes in a Jewish cemetery.[5]”
This
can give us confidence that real effort was being made to preserve the text.
2. Comparing the 10th century Hebrew
Text of Isaiah and the 100 BC text of Isaiah demonstrates that this method was
very effective in making accurate copies of the text. Very few and minor variations were
found. Here is clear evidence that the
text could be preserved for over 1000 years accurately.
3.
The Greek Version of the Hebrew Bible was used by the early Christian Church as
an accurate translation. Here is a
confirmation that the books the Hebrews accepted were set aside as sacred and
that these writings that state the same thing as our Old Testaments today were
known and used by Christians and Jews.
4. For
those who hold the testimony of the Messiah Jesus of authoritative the accepted the Hebrew Canon
of HIS day and quoted from it to support HIS own teachings.
Matthew 5:17-19 NASB - "17
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not
come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven
and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law
until all is accomplished. 19 "Whoever then annuls one of the least of
these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in
the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called
great in the kingdom of heaven."
Luk 24:44 NASB - "44 Now He
said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still
with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and
the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.""
There
is no doubt that the Messiah Jesus accepted and taught from the writings of
Moses, the Prophets, and The Psalms as God’s inspired Word. This was a way of descripting the Hebrew
Canon accepted in Palestine. If one sees
reason to accept Jesus as an authority from God then one also has good reason
to accept the Hebrew Bible as God’s Word. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scolls there is little doubt that the Hebrew Bible we have today is substainially the same as the Hebrew and Greek translation that Messiah Jesus endorsed.
5. There are so many documents of the New
Testament and the older can be compared with the younger that no serious change
in the text could have occurred without scholars detecting it. The differences in the text are minor. No significant teaching of the Christian
faith is in any way changed or threatened due to the variations found in the
thousands of New Testament source documents.
Conclusion:
There
was no real opportunity for some major corruption of the original texts to take
place. There was no gaps of thousands of
years in which we had no texts and then had texts. If we have reason to trust in the person and
work of Messiah Jesus then we also have good reason to accept the texts of
Moses and the prophets we now have as realatively accurate copies. One
can with reasonable integrity believe that God has preserved HIS Word through the
people of Christ and for the people of Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment