.
Subsections
Lost, Greek Text of the KJV & Back-Translating
OT Textual Criticism
.
.
Order of Contents
Intro
Main Schools
Collection of Works
Older Works
Historical
.
Introduction
Textual Criticism is the science of trying to reconstruct the original autographs of the Scriptures from the many manuscripts that we have today (which vary about about 1% in the Majority Text and 7-13 % in the Critical Texts).
‘Higher Criticism’, as exercised by liberals, assumes and operates on unbelieving and destructive principles to the Bible. ‘Lower Criticism’ is the legitimate work of the Church, putting oneself under the authority of the text, and seeking to be faithful to God in using our sanctified wisdom in order to preserve and maintain the deposit of his heavenly Revelation to mankind.
Why does textual criticism matter? Because most Bible versions today (besides the KJV & NKJV) are based largely off of the Critical Texts. While no primary doctrine of Christianity is lost in these versions, many secondary and tertiary doctrines are significantly altered. See here for a list of 40 Doctrinally Significant Variants.¹
¹ Mt 5:22,44; 6:1,13; 9:13; 17:21; 18:11; 19:17; 20:16; 20:22; 23:14; Mk 1:2; 6:11; 7:8; 9:29,44,46,49; 10:21,24; 16:9-20; Lk 2:40; 18:28; 22:43-44, 64; 23:34, 42, 45; Jn 1:18; 3:13; 5:4; Acts 2:30; 8:37; 10:30; 24:6-8; 28:29; Rom 8:1; 11:6; 1 Tim. 3:16; James 2:20; 1 Jn 4:3.
.
The Main Schools of Thought
The Ecclesiastical Text (recommended)
See here for an introduction as to how the manuscripts of the New Testament have been providentially preserved by God through the ages. The King James’ Textus Receptus comes from this tradition.
.
Reasoned Eclecticism – The most popular school of thought today
Pro
Snapp, James – ‘Equitable Eclecticism: the Future of New Testament Textual Criticism’
Eclecticism means to pick and choose from various paradigms. ‘Reasoned’ and ‘Equitable’ refers to giving things their proper due weight, as opposed to a consistent and systematic critical text approach. This view is something of a middle view (though in practice it often leans 85% to the critical texts and shares many of their presuppositions).
Snapp gives an excellent introduction to the concept of textual criticism, one of the best overviews of the modern and recent history of textual criticism, and gives many helpful principles of doing textual criticism (much of which the Majority Text school of thought would agree with). Read this, learn and be humbled.
.
Con
Wilson, Andrew – The Problem with Reasoned Eclecticism n.d. 53 paragraphs
Wilson is a published author in the field. The article is technical and offers 4 problems with Reasoned Eclecticism, though the main one is simply that it follows the Critical Texts nearly all the time and its appearance of neutrality otherwise is a facade.
Wilson calls his own position Balanced Eclecticism, which is something of a middle position between Reasoned Eclecticism and the Majority Text.
Wilson, Andrew – ‘Prefer the Shorter Reading?’ n.d. 8 paragraphs with two charts
One of the most foundational pillars of critical textual criticism since its rise in the late 1800’s has been to (almost always) prefer the shorter reading, which pillar is still widely popular today. The unproven assumption was that scribes would most often have willingly expanded the text (contrary to any fear of God and the testimony of the early Church Fathers).
This pillar of modern textual criticism, unbeknownst to many, has been thoroughly disproved by half a dozen recent textual studies. Consistent with common sense, scribes, insofar as they unintentionally made mistakes, most often simply left a letter or word out (bad eyesight). Wilson provides a table. Modern textual criticism, which underlies the basis of most modern Bible versions, has no clothes on; but rather has been cutting out the Word of God (Rev. 22:18-19).
.
The Critical Texts (not recommended)
In the mid-late 1800’s 3 or so rather full N.T. manuscripts were uncovered in the sands of Egypt, which appear to be from circa A.D. 250. As these were older than the many Majority Texts we had at the time (many from the 300’s), they were thought by many to be more accurate.
However, while the Majority Text differs in a about 1% with itself, the Critical Texts differ about 8-13% with themselves and with what the Church previously used throughout Church history. Today we have found numerous early paper manuscripts from the 2nd century that have confirmed Majority Text readings.
It is believed by the contributors to this website, with much scholarship, that the Critical Texts are inferior and corrupt manuscripts. To see the very full evidence that points to this conclusion, see some of the numerous articles on the Majority Text page. Most Bible versions today are based off of the Critical Texts.
.
A Collection of Works on Textual Criticism
Library of New Testament Textual Criticism
This collection by James Snapp, Jr. includes 70 of the major textual critical works available on the internet, both conservative and liberal.
.
Older Articles
1800’s
Cunningham, William – ‘The General Integrity of the Original Text of Scripture, Westminster Confession of Faith’, ch. 1.8 (1878), p. 525, 25 pp. being chs. 43 & 44 of Theological Lectures
Dabney, Robert – ‘The Doctrinal Various Readings of the New Testament Greek’ in Discussions, vol. 1, p. 350 ff.
Gaussen, Louis – ‘On Sacred Criticism’, p. 324, 25 pp. being ch. 6 of Theopneustia: The Divine Inspiration of the Bible
.
1900’s
Whitley, William Thomas – VIII. ‘A Study in Textual Criticism’ in Princeton Theological Review 1.1 (1903), pp. 93-100
Whitlely demonstrates that the canons used to redact critical editions of the New Testament are simply incorrect.
“A dozen intelligent Christians were desired to copy exactly two passages: eight of these were theological students and knew something of the theories of textual criticism; all were urged to be scrupulously precise, were interested in the subject-matter, and had abundance of time.
The result was to show that additions were absent, omissions frequent, alterations nearly always for the worse. Is it not high time that these canons were subjected to a thorough testing?”
.
.
Historical
Marlowe, Michael D. – ‘Textual Criticism in the Writings of Francis Turretin: A Case Study in the History of Criticism and Dogma’ (2003) at Bible-Researcher
.
.
.
Related Pages