New Testament Textual Criticism examines the existing manuscript witnesses to the New Testament in order to produce a text that is as close as possible to the original. The New Testament has been preserved in more manuscripts than any other ancient work, having over 5,300 Greek manuscripts dating from the 3rd century to the 16th century. The task of the textual critic, therefore, is to sort through the variants and establish a “critical text” that is intended to represent the original by best explaining the state of all extant witnesses.
The details of the textual variants among the existing manuscripts is the focus of textual criticism. Discussions regarding “which is the best Greek text” can often cause concern for the laymen. However, we should not let scholarly concerns “make a mountain out of a mole hill.”
According to Daniel Wallace, “When one examines the variations between the Greek text behind the KJV (the Textus Receptus) and the Greek text behind modern translations, it is discovered that the vast majority of variations are so trivial as to not even be translatable (the most common is the moveable nu, which is akin to the difference between “who” and “whom”!) . . . When one compares the number of variations that are found in the various MSS with the actual variations between the Textus Receptus and the best Greek witnesses, it is found that these two are remarkably similar. There are over 400,000 textual variants among NT MSS. But the differences between the Textus Receptus and texts based on the best Greek witnesses number about 5000 — and most of these are untranslatable differences! In other words, over 98% of the time, the Textus Receptus and the standard critical editions agree.”
See more at http://www.theopedia.com/New_Testament_Textual_Criticism
August 8, 2006 at 2:07 pm
Metzger’s Textual Criticism Criteria
1. External Evidence
* Date of the witness/type of text
* Geographical distribution of the witnesses that agree in supporting a variant
* Genealogical relationship of texts and families of witnesses – Witnesses should be weighed, not counted
2. Internal Evidence
a. Transcriptional Probabilities depend upon considerations of palaeographical details and the habits of scribes
* In general the more difficult reading is to be preferred
* In general the shorter reading is to be preferred
* That reading is to be preferred which stands in verbal dissidence with the other
b. Intrinsic Probabilities depend upon considerations of what the author was more likely to have written, taking into account:
* The style and vocabular of the author
* The immediate context
* Harmony with the usage of the author elsewhere
* The Aramaic background of the teaching of Jesus
* The priority of the Gospel according to Mark
* The influence of the Christian community upon the formulation and transmission of the passage in quesiton
Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pg. 209-210
August 8, 2006 at 2:09 pm
Twelve Critical Text Rules of Aland
1. Only one reading can be original, however many variant readings there may be.
2. Only the readings which best satisfies the requirements of both external and internal criteria can be original.
3. Criticism of the text must always begin from the evidence of the manuscript tradition and only afterward turn to a consideration of internal criteria.
4. Internal criteria (the context of the passage, its style and vocabulary, the theological environment of the author, etc.) can never be the sole basis for a critical decision, especially when they stand in opposition to the external evidence.
5. The primary authority for a critical textual decision lies with the Greek manuscript tradition, with the version and Fathers serving no more than a supplementary and corroborative function, particularly in passages where their underlying Greek text cannot be reconstructed with absolute certainty.
6. Furthermore, manuscripts should be weighed, not counted, and the peculiar traits of each manuscript should be duly considered. However important the early papyri, or a particular uncial, or a minuscule may be, there is no single manuscript or group or manuscripts that can be followed mechanically, even though certain combinations of witnesses may deserve a greater degree of confidence than others. Rather, decisions in textual criticism must be worked out afresh, passage by passage (the local principle).
7. The principle that the original reading may be found in any single manuscript or version when it stands alone or nearly alone is only a theoretical possibility. Any form of eclecticism which accepts this principle will hardly succeed in establishing the original text of the New Testament; it will only confirm the view of the text which it presupposes.
8. The reconstruction of a stemma of readings for each variant (the genealogical principle) is an extremely important device, because the reading which can most easily explain the derivation of the other forms is itself most likely the original.
9. Variants must never be treated in isolation, but always considered in the context of the tradition. Otherwise there is too great a danger of reconstructing a “test tube text” which never existed at any time or place.
10. There is truth in the maxim: lectio difficilior lectio potior (“the more difficult reading is the more probable reading”). But this principle must not be taken too mechanically, with the most difficult reading (lectio difficilima) adopted as original simply because of its degree of difficulty.
11. The venerable maxim lectio brevior lectio potior (“the shorter reading is the more probable reading”) is certainly right in many instances. But here again the principle cannot be applied mechanically.
12. A constantly maintained familiarity with New Testament manuscripts themselves is the best training for textual criticism. In textual criticism the pure theoretician has often done more harm than good.
Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 275-276.
August 10, 2006 at 6:26 am
Gumball…
I am Karin, very interesting article that contained the information I was searching for in Google, thanks….