What is this? | Contents Page | Summary

Overview Why Apologetics? Did Jesus Exist?  Is the Bible Reliable?  Jesus' Claims  Was Jesus God?  Conclusion

Overview > Is the New Testament reliable? > Bibliographical Test

The Bibliographical Test

This is an examination of the textual transmission by which the documents reached us. As we no longer have the original documents, how reliable are the copies we currently have? How can we be sure that the documents we have, are accurate copies of the originals? How can we be sure that there have not been significant changes or errors made in the process of copying over the years?

Summary

The Bibliographical test examines textual transmission i.e. do we have accurate copies of what was originally recorded?
  1. How many copies of the document are available and what variances exist between the copies?

    • More than 24000 manuscript copies in multiple languages / translations. Located over a wide geographical area (Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, Italy)

    • Textual criticism (examining copyist errors, corruptions) finds that there are only minor variations (spelling, phraseology, etc.) and is able to state that we can be 99% sure that we have accurate copies of the originals. What's more, no core belief of Christianity is dependant on any textual variant.

  2. What length of time is there between the original and our earliest existing copy?

    1. Several fragments have been dated within 50-150 years of the original documents. Several nearly complete NT manuscripts dating within 300-400 years of the original. In fact, there are 500 different copies of the NT that are earlier than 500 AD.

  3. Other classical manuscripts considered historically trustworthy

    • Iliad - earliest copy 500 years and 642 current copies
    • Pliny - 750 years and 7 copies
    • Plato - 1200 years and 7 copies
    • Livy - 350 years and 20 copies

  4. Additional evidence against the claim that there were purposeful changes

    1. Practically impossible
    2. All copies and language versions agree in content
    3. T can be reconstructed from the early Church Fathers writings (quotes)
    4. No time for the falsifications to occur or any evidence evidence to support this claim.

In order to establish that we have accurate copies of the original documents, the Bibliographical test examines the following questions:

  1. How many copies of the document in question are available and what variances exist between the copies? [7]

    This enables us to compare the copies with each other. The more copies we have the better the comparisons that we can make. If the copies of a document are filled with significant differences, then it would not be possible to know what the original author wrote! But if the variances are few and minor, then the process of copying over the years has been faithful to the original.[7]

  2. What length of time passed between the original and the earliest copies? [7]

    If the earliest copies we have were written hundreds of years after the original, a lot of changes could have been made and we wouldn't know about it. But a short interval of time would increase our assurance in the reliability of the copies.[7]

How many copies of New Testament manuscripts are available?

There are now over 5,300 known Greek manuscripts; over 10 000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts and at least 9300 other early versions (e.g. Ethiopic, Slavic, Armenian, Arabic). If we add these all together, there are more than 24 000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today! [5 p. 39]

Lets us compare this amount with the number of copies of other ancient historical writings: [5 p. 42]

a) The 'Iliad' by Homer has the second greatest number of manuscript copies of any work of antiquity. There are 643 manuscript copies. Here are some examples of other works of antiquity:

b) Caesar's "Gallic wars" (10 manuscript copies)

c) Livy (20 manuscript copies)

d) Plato's 'Tetralogies' (7 manuscript copies)

e) Pliny The Younger's 'History' (7 manuscript copies)

f) Sophocles (193 manuscript copies)

The number of manuscript copies of the New Testament far surpasses the number of copies of any other ancient document.

What length of time passed between the original and the earliest copies?

Several papyrus fragments, which contain significant portions of the New Testament, have been dated to within 50-150 years of the original New Testament documents. [7] Examples include:

a) John Ryland's MS (130 AD) contains a portion of the Gospel of John and was found in Egypt

b) Bodmer Papyrus II (150-200 AD) contains most of John

c) Chester Beatty Papyri (200 AD) contains major portions of the New Testament

We also have several nearly complete New Testament Greek manuscripts, which were copied within 300-400 years of the originals [7], for example:

a) Codex Sinaiticus (350 AD), found near Mt. Sinai

b) Codex Alexandrinus (400 AD), found near Alexandria in Egypt

c) Codex Vaticanus (325-350AD), located at the Vatican in Rome

In fact, there are 500 different copies of the New Testament that are earlier than 500 AD. [1 p. 162]

Let us again compare this with other classical manuscripts [7]:

a) The 'Iliad' by Homer - the earliest copy is 500 years removed from the original

b) Caesar's "Gallic wars" - 1000 years

c) Livy - 350 years (and the earliest copy is only a fragment).

d) Plato's 'Tetralogies' - 1200 years.

e) Pliny The Younger's 'History' - 750 years.

Since scholars accept as generally trustworthy the writings of the ancient classics, even though the earliest manuscripts were written so long after the original writings and the number of existing manuscripts is in many instances so small, it is clear that the reliability of the text of the New Testament is likewise assured.[6 p. 45]

What variances exist between the copies of the New Testament

The process of critically studying a text, examining the copyists' errors, omissions, additions and other corruptions which have crept into the text since it was first written is known as textual criticism. Scholars use this process to determine how much of the document we are able to recover and designate as authentic.

With respect to the New Testament, there are some variations between the many thousands of manuscripts available. However, the vast majority are very minor (spelling, differences in phraseology, etc.) and modern translations of the New Testament text often note the differences in footnotes. [7]

Textual criticism of the New Testament documents is no different from textual criticism of any other secular texts. [3] Having said this, it is significant to note that textual criticism has been able to recover the New Testament text with 99% accuracy. We are able to say that 99% of our current copy of the New Testament documents is an accurate copy of the originals! Furthermore, no doctrine (core belief) of Christianity is dependent on any textual variant. [8]

Comments on Collusion

One objection that is sometimes raised is that the later church conspired to eliminate discrepancies and made purposeful changes to the text of the New Testament. Although we examine this claim more thoroughly in the Internal Evidence Test (the section on possible Gospel Fictions), it is worth making certain points here.

  • Textual conspiracies such as are often suggested would be practically impossible - there is no way that the church could have eliminated ALL known readings of a given text! [8]

  • No other ancient work is available in so many copies and languages, and yet all these various versions agree in content. [1 p. 194]

  • The numerous manuscripts were located over a wide geographical distribution (for example Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, and Italy). Yet, there are only trifling discrepancies. The differences that do exist are quite minor and are predominately the result of unintentional mistakes. [1 p. 194] & [8]

  • The New Testament documents could not have been corrupted without a great outcry on the part of all orthodox Christians. [1 p. 195]

  • The quotations of the New Testament books by the early church Fathers all coincide. [1 p. 195] In fact, the early church Fathers quote the New Testament so extensively that all of the New Testament, except for eleven verses, can be found in their existing works. [5 p. 51]

  • There is no precise time when the falsification could have occurred as the New Testament documents are cited by the church Fathers in regular and close succession. The text could not have been falsified before the church Fathers writings, as then the apostles were still alive and could refute such tampering. [1 p. 195]

  • Also working against any idea that some important text was lost or added is evidence that textual criticism was already in process as early as the second and third century. Origen complains of negligence and audacity by scribes; Jerome takes note of various scribal errors, and so on. They were on guard against any variations. [8]

  • The text of the New Testament is every bit as reliable as the text of the classical works of antiquity. To reject the textual reliability of the New Testament would be to reverse all the rules of criticism and to reject all the works of antiquity, since the text of those works is less certain than that of the New Testament. [1 p. 195]

  • There is no solid textual evidence to support the idea that the church made deliberate changes to the New Testament. [8]

    Bibliographical Test Conclusion

    The evidence for our New Testament writings is so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning. [7] Most historians accept the textual accuracy of other ancient works on far less adequate manuscript grounds than is available for the New Testament.[8]

    The New Testament passes the tests for historical documents better than any other ancient historical document, and we can safely say that our present New Testament text is a very accurate copy of the original!

    Now that we have established the textual reliability of the New Testament, we need to establish whether its accounts are historically reliable. This leads us to the internal and external evidence tests.

     

     


  • (c) 1999 - Richard Helsby

    Comments and suggestions are welcome

    This Free Apologetic Study is available in a small group study format