Restoring the NT Text Commentary and Excerpts From the Book by Neil R. Lightfoot

Restoring the NT Text NT text had been born through centuries by means of manuscripts and other materials NT text had been born through centuries by means of manuscripts and other materials –Mistakes were bound to happen –The primary concern is what affect mistakes have on the text –Practically all variations found among all extant manuscripts do not affect our present text –The few textual problems that remain are explained in footnotes etc. of recent translations Understanding that the text is sound and why now enables us to learn about our accepted text and something of its history Understanding that the text is sound and why now enables us to learn about our accepted text and something of its history

Restoring the Text Our modern Greek text should be considered a restored or reconstructed text Our modern Greek text should be considered a restored or reconstructed text –Only two things can be done Select a single manuscript and declare it an authority and the standard text Select a single manuscript and declare it an authority and the standard text Consult a number of manuscripts and authorities and by comparison reconstruct a text acceptable as like the original Consult a number of manuscripts and authorities and by comparison reconstruct a text acceptable as like the original –No one manuscript is free of scribal error Consultation has always been followed in the printing of the Greek NT Consultation has always been followed in the printing of the Greek NT –Our modern text is an edition of the NT –It has been restored through all the aids of textual criticism

Authorities for Restoring the Text If we did not have a modern edition of the NT how would we go about restoring it? If we did not have a modern edition of the NT how would we go about restoring it? Manuscripts – Vatican, Siniatic, Alexandrian, Ephrahem Manuscript, Codex Bezae and others Manuscripts – Vatican, Siniatic, Alexandrian, Ephrahem Manuscript, Codex Bezae and others –Manuscripts of the original language (Greek) –Not all of equal weight Some are good, better, and a few best Some are good, better, and a few best –Some of these habitually agree in their readings and are obviously derived from a common ancestor These are called a “text type” These are called a “text type” These can be traced back to different quarters of the world These can be traced back to different quarters of the world –Alexandria and Egypt (Alexandrian) –Antioch of Syria (Syrian or Byzantine) –Western Europe (Western) Since these represent a wide range of textual variations, whenever they agree on a reading, this is textual certainty Since these represent a wide range of textual variations, whenever they agree on a reading, this is textual certainty

Authorities for Restoring the Text Versions – Syriac, Latin, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, Ethiopic and Georgian Versions – Syriac, Latin, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, Ethiopic and Georgian –All appeared in the early centuries of the Christian era –They had to made from some Greek text –Each different type of text provides us with an independent line of witnesses Early Christian writers Early Christian writers –Most lived near the end of the 1 st century and early into the 2 nd, they wrote extensively of their religion and quoted frequently from Scripture –Volume upon volume of writing of these “Church Fathers” have been preserved –These writing are literally filled with quotations of the NT from their copies which were much older than ours –The reading of their many quotations tells us much about the early church –So extensive are these quotations that if all other sources for the NT were lost, these would be sufficient to reconstruct practically all of the NT The manuscripts, the versions and citations from early Christian are the tools used to restore the NT text The manuscripts, the versions and citations from early Christian are the tools used to restore the NT text –There are so many readings available we come so near to the original autographs as to all but grasp them in our hands

The Greek NT in Print Erasmus of Rotterdam edited and published the first printed Greek NT Erasmus of Rotterdam edited and published the first printed Greek NT –1516, invited by a printer John Froben in Basle, Switzerland –Erasmus had learned Greek and had worked on his own Latin translation –He was known as Europe’s greatest scholar The edition used parallel columns with Greek on the left and Latin on the right The edition used parallel columns with Greek on the left and Latin on the right –The Latin was not Jerome’s Vulgate but Erasmus’ own translation –Erasmus also attached about 1,000 pages of notes and essays –The volume was rushed through printing in about five months because a Spanish Bible in Hebrew, Greek and Latin was underway and Erasmus wanted to get ahead of it Erasmus’ NT Erasmus’ NT –1 st publication of the NT in Greek –Prepared using a few late Greek manuscripts that were available –Edited and carried through printing very hastily –Although corrected by 4 subsequent editions of Erasmus its many shortcomings would be perpetuated by subsequent editors of the Greek text Despite all this Erasmus did lead the way in valuing Greek manuscripts over Latin Despite all this Erasmus did lead the way in valuing Greek manuscripts over Latin He also spoke boldly against the Roman Church, Bishops, secular scholars and Monks were all publicly dragged out for wrongs He also spoke boldly against the Roman Church, Bishops, secular scholars and Monks were all publicly dragged out for wrongs

Seeds of Reformation After Erasmus came a man named Stephanus Estienne After Erasmus came a man named Stephanus Estienne –1546 through 51 brought out several editions of the Greek text –3 rd and 4 th editions were most noteworthy 1551, first time text was divided into verses 1551, first time text was divided into verses To this day when citing NT verses it is Stephanus’ arrangement that is used To this day when citing NT verses it is Stephanus’ arrangement that is used –The edition of 1550 “the Royal edition” was smaller, 9 x 13, it was very beautiful and almost entirely used Erasmus’ text From this, plus minor alterations, came the “Received Text” From this, plus minor alterations, came the “Received Text” The Protestant Reformer Theodore Beza forwarded Stephanus’ work by putting out a number of Greek editions, , but they were essentially the text of Stephanus The Protestant Reformer Theodore Beza forwarded Stephanus’ work by putting out a number of Greek editions, , but they were essentially the text of Stephanus –This was the type of text used by the translators of the KJ By now the Greek text had become standardized By now the Greek text had become standardized –A Dutch family, the Elzevirs, confirmed this with their edition in 1633, “You have the text now received by all” written in Latin which read “Textus Receptus” or “Received Text” –This edition was scarcely different from the Stephanus text which is about the same as the Erasmus text –Erasmus’ text is based on no more than a handful of late Greek manuscripts

The Evidence Mounts As more and earlier manuscripts came to light demands became strong for an improved Greek text As more and earlier manuscripts came to light demands became strong for an improved Greek text –The Alexandrian Uncial came to England in 1627, as a 4 th century document it predated Erasmus’ sources by 700 years –Collations of manuscripts began to appear, then evidence from the versions and then quotations of early Christian writers

The KJ Our issues can be many Our issues can be many 1) The Vulgate 1) The Vulgate –No one knows for sure who translated Acts through Revelations It was certainly Jerome but he did not declare it in writing It was certainly Jerome but he did not declare it in writing –The original commission was only to gather all of the Old Latin writings and create one Bible Thankfully it appears with the Gospels that Greek writings were consulted Thankfully it appears with the Gospels that Greek writings were consulted 2) Codex Bezae, known for its peculiar readings and general issues with the “Western” type of text was the only uncial available for the original KJ writers 2) Codex Bezae, known for its peculiar readings and general issues with the “Western” type of text was the only uncial available for the original KJ writers 3) The “Received Text” has as its beginnings a hastily prepared translation that used only a handful of very late Greek manuscripts 3) The “Received Text” has as its beginnings a hastily prepared translation that used only a handful of very late Greek manuscripts –Even though subsequent editions made changes, the errors of the original perpetuated throughout the publications –Stephanus Etienne and Theodore Beza did little revision of the text 4) The Alexandrian uncial has many disagreements with the KJ and it predates the KJ source material by 700 years 4) The Alexandrian uncial has many disagreements with the KJ and it predates the KJ source material by 700 years

John Mill + Richard Bentley Dr. John Mill of Oxford Dr. John Mill of Oxford –After 30yrs, in 1707, he issued his edition of the Greek NT –He wanted to present as much of the existing evidence on the text as was possible He gathered previous collations, collated additional manuscripts himself, and had colleagues make yet more collations He gathered previous collations, collated additional manuscripts himself, and had colleagues make yet more collations Along with the testimony of the manuscripts he included Along with the testimony of the manuscripts he included –Abundant information from the ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Latin) –Writings of the Church Fathers Mills’ work was not a new NT, he did what his predecessors had done and merely reprinted the Stephanus text of 1550 Mills’ work was not a new NT, he did what his predecessors had done and merely reprinted the Stephanus text of 1550 Mills’ work provoked controversy because of the large number of variants (30,000) Mills’ work provoked controversy because of the large number of variants (30,000) –The problem was including so much from the Church Fathers and so many collations Many charged that Mill’s had only succeeded in making the text uncertain Many charged that Mill’s had only succeeded in making the text uncertain

John Mill + Richard Bentley In 1713, Anthony Collins, published a pamphlet “Discourse of Free-Thinking” that slammed the Bible and held up works such as Mills’ as evidence In 1713, Anthony Collins, published a pamphlet “Discourse of Free-Thinking” that slammed the Bible and held up works such as Mills’ as evidence Richard Bentley, a great classics scholar from Trinity College in Cambridge, wrote “Remarks upon a Late Discourse of Free-Thinking” Richard Bentley, a great classics scholar from Trinity College in Cambridge, wrote “Remarks upon a Late Discourse of Free-Thinking” Bentley sought to defend Mills’ text against those who magnified textual variations Bentley sought to defend Mills’ text against those who magnified textual variations –He also wanted to clearly speak out against those who defended the “Received Text” at all costs Bentley went on to plan and begin an entirely new edition of the “Received Text” that would be corrective and use original Greek Bentley went on to plan and begin an entirely new edition of the “Received Text” that would be corrective and use original Greek –He died before finishing it and no one took up the cause

The Westcott-Hort Text The original Greek is our source for all of our NT translations The original Greek is our source for all of our NT translations In the middle of the nineteenth century two extraordinary things happened In the middle of the nineteenth century two extraordinary things happened –1) Tischendorf’s discovery of the Sinaitic Manuscript –2) His successful collation of the Vatican Manuscript The availability of these witnesses gave momentum for a new edition of the Greek text and for a thorough revision of the Authorized or King James Version The availability of these witnesses gave momentum for a new edition of the Greek text and for a thorough revision of the Authorized or King James Version

1881 Two Cambridge scholars: Two Cambridge scholars: –Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort May 12 th published the first of two volumes entitled “The New Testament in the Original Greek” May 12 th published the first of two volumes entitled “The New Testament in the Original Greek” It was a completely new text revised or reconstructed with accuracy It was a completely new text revised or reconstructed with accuracy Tischendorf and other Biblical scholars had long set aside the “Received Text” or “KJ” but fully accepted the work of Westcott and Hort as definitive Tischendorf and other Biblical scholars had long set aside the “Received Text” or “KJ” but fully accepted the work of Westcott and Hort as definitive

Westcott and Hort On September 4 th the 2 nd edition came out with an Appendix and Introduction On September 4 th the 2 nd edition came out with an Appendix and Introduction Appendix: had notes on selected textual problems Appendix: had notes on selected textual problems Introduction: comprises a monumental discussion of the principles underlying the Westcott-Hort Greek text Introduction: comprises a monumental discussion of the principles underlying the Westcott-Hort Greek text They had labored thirty years and the achievement was revolutionary They had labored thirty years and the achievement was revolutionary –Not because of new ideas but because of the deliberate thoroughness of their work and the principles that backed it up –No piece of evidence was passed over, no authority had been set aside without vetting The Westcott-Hort text was a rejection of mass authorities and an acknowledged dependence on the Sinaitic and Vatican Manuscripts, particularly the Vatican The Westcott-Hort text was a rejection of mass authorities and an acknowledged dependence on the Sinaitic and Vatican Manuscripts, particularly the Vatican Every edition of the Greek text since Westcott-Hort has only confirmed their miraculous work Every edition of the Greek text since Westcott-Hort has only confirmed their miraculous work In the same year, 1881, the English Revised Version of the NT appeared In the same year, 1881, the English Revised Version of the NT appeared –It received immense attention –While it was not entirely based on Westcott-Hort, they were on the Revision Committee

English Revised and Westcott Hort There were “Received Text” scholars and proponents on the committee of the English Revised Version There were “Received Text” scholars and proponents on the committee of the English Revised Version –The fact that the text so heavily relies on Westcott-Hort speaks to its validity The Westcott-Hort text along with the English Revised Version dealt the final blow to the “Received Text” on which the KJ Version is based The Westcott-Hort text along with the English Revised Version dealt the final blow to the “Received Text” on which the KJ Version is based The work begun by Tischendorf, carried on by Mills and then Bentley, finally came to public recognition as definitive and authoritative The work begun by Tischendorf, carried on by Mills and then Bentley, finally came to public recognition as definitive and authoritative

Summary Our NT is a reconstructed or restored text Our NT is a reconstructed or restored text It has been reconstructed using the rules of textual criticism and modern scholarship from three independent lines of witnesses It has been reconstructed using the rules of textual criticism and modern scholarship from three independent lines of witnesses –1) the manuscripts, 2) the versions, 3) writings of the early Church Fathers 1516 Erasmus: First NT in Greek 1516 Erasmus: First NT in Greek –Based on a few late manuscripts 1550 Stephanus: published a beautiful edition of the Greek that became the “Received Text” 1550 Stephanus: published a beautiful edition of the Greek that became the “Received Text” –Almost identical with Erasmus’ work –Printed and accepted for almost 300 years 1881 and Westcott-Hort published their work and it holds true to this day with only slight modifications 1881 and Westcott-Hort published their work and it holds true to this day with only slight modifications All new editions of the NT and almost all new translations heavily depend on Westcott-Hort All new editions of the NT and almost all new translations heavily depend on Westcott-Hort

For Discussion What three main sources are available to us in restoring the original text of the New Testament? What three main sources are available to us in restoring the original text of the New Testament? –Manuscripts, versions, Church Fathers –Manuscripts = Vatican, Sinaitic, Alexandrian Which is the most important source? Which is the most important source? –Manuscripts (Vatican) What is the text of Erasmus? What is the text of Erasmus? –A hastily prepared manuscript based on very late Greek manuscripts and Erasmus’ own Latin translation Why is the work of Erasmus important? Why is the work of Erasmus important? –It was the first Greek NT in print and it was the basis for what would become the “Received Text” What is the “Received Text”? What is the “Received Text”? –Stephanus’ third edition (1550) known as the Royal edition because of its beauty and based almost entirely on Erasmus –From this edition with a few slight alterations came the text know as the “Received Text” Who were the two textual scholars who produced a completely revised edition of the Greek text? Who were the two textual scholars who produced a completely revised edition of the Greek text? –Westcott and Hort