1. Class XI: Intro to Textual Criticism and Greek Manuscripts
GRE 4221 Beginning Greek II
Class XI: Intro to Textual Criticism and Greek Manuscripts
© Dr. Esa Autero

2. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
1.1 Introduction
What are the current GNT editions?
Their history
What are the major witnesses to GNT?
Four major manuscript groups
How to use the GNT?

3. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
2.1 GNT – its history and manuscripts
Introduction
Most recent editions of GNT
NA 28 (NA 27/26, NA 25…)
UBS 5th ed. (4th ed., 3rd ed. 2nd …)
SBL GNT (Holmes)
Majority Text edition (=MT)* (from Textus Receptus [=TR])
Precedents
Westcott & Hort (The NT in the Original Greek, 1881)
von Tischendorf (1872)
Majority Text/Textus Receptus
Same text, different critical apparatus
*The New Testament in the Original Greek According to the Byzantine/ Majority Textform edited by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont and The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text edited by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad. 

4. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Erasmus of Rotterdam ( )
Novum Instrumentum (1516) – very poorly edited*
Novum Testamentum (1519) + subsequent eds. 1522, 1527, 1536
2nd ed. (1519) corrected in 400+ places
Erasmus used only 7 late mss. (11th to 15th century)
Used to translate Geneva Bible and AV (KJV 1611)
Complutensian polyglot ** (1514 – published 1522***)
Parallel OT (Hb., Vulgate, LXX) & NT (Vulgate, Greek)
Origen the first text critic
Hexapla – six parallel editions (mostly lost)
*Erasmus had to retranslate the last six verses of Revelation from Latin Vulgate to Greek in order to complete his Greek edition. He also created some Greek words that did/do not exist.
**Complutensian polyglot was published all at once (6 vols.) that consisted of 4 vols. Of OT, NT, and 1 vol. of dictionaries and study aids. OT had three columns (Hebrew text, Vulgate, and LXX); NT had Greek and Vulgate.
***Publication was delayed because the whole work was to be published at the same time. At the same time Erasmus hurried to get his Novum Instrumentum published – to be the first Greek NT.

5. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Critical text tradition OR KJV only?
Emphasis on early Papyri and codices (Westcott and Hort)
Critical Editions (CT):
- NA 28 (and earlier eds.)
- UBS 5th ed. (and earlier)
- SBL GNT
Most modern translations
(NASB, NIV, ESV, NRSV)
*The New Testament in the Original Greek According to the Byzantine/ Majority Textform edited by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont and The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text edited by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad.
**90% of all manuscripts are written with Byzantine text type tradition; yet, the tradition appear later (from 4th century) than early papyri and codices.  
Emphasis on Byzantine text type** (Majority Text)
Majority Text (MT)*:
- NT acc. to Byzantine/Majority Text
- GNT acc. to Majority Text
KJV and others in
KJV tradition

6. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
From GNT to Manuscripts and Back
What text we have in the modern GNT (e.g. NA 28)?
A reconstructed Greek text
Main text & apparatus w/ textual variants
How did GNT NA 28 come about?
History of GNT editions (see previous slides)
Establishing the most probable text – closest to the original

7. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
From Paul to textual critic to GNT
Autographs do not exist
E.g. 1 Cor  copied to church in Antioch etc.
Today’s manuscripts – thousands of variant readings
Scribal errors – unintentional & intentional*
Finding the most reliable manuscripts [and groups]
Date and character
Geographical distribution
Genealogical relationship of texts and families
Weight not count of witnesses
Original  copy  copy of copies…  reconstructed GNT
*Clarify, smooth out grammar or content, correct previous scribe’s errors, theological motivations.

8. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
The Major Manuscript Families
The four manuscript families
1.) The Alexandrian text – best and most faithful
Characterized by brevity and austerity
Generally shorter than other readings
Most important witnesses
Codex Vaticanus (B) – 4th century
Codex Sinaiticus (א) – 4th century
P66, P75 [Bodmer papyri late 2nd century]
 Archetype early 2nd century

9. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
2.) The Western Text – puzzling features
Italy, Gaul, North Africa
Known by Marcion, Tatian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian
Fondness for paraphrase
Words, clauses & sentences changed, omitted, inserted due to harmonization, enrichment & apocryphal traditions
Acts is 10% longer than the [reconstructed] original
Most important witnesses
Codex Bezae (D) – 5th cent.
Codex Claromontanus (D) – 6th cent.
Codex Washingtonianus (D) – 5th cent.
P38 (AD 300) & P48 (end of 4th cent.)

10. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
3.) The Eastern (Caesarean) Text
Mixture of Alexandrian and western readings
Question of category
Most important witnesses
Ψ- 9th cent.
565 (9th cent.)
700 (11th cent.)

11. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
4.) The Byzantine (Koine) text – least reliable & most abundant
Most recent & least reliable
Characterized by lucidity and completeness
Smoothing out “rough” parts & harmonization
2-3 divergent readings combined into new reading
From Antioch to Constantinopole to Byzantine empire
Codex Alexandrinus (A), 5th century*
Later uncials
Later minuscules
*Alexandrinus is a mixed text type as the Gospels are Byzantine but the rest in Alexandrian type.

12. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Most numerous of all manuscript families
From 6/7th to Reformation and as the authoritative text
Used by Erasmus for NI (1516)
Textus Receptus (Bonaventura & Elzevir 1633)
 Authoritative text until modern textual findings
Basis for all translations up to 19th century
First corrections of Textus Receptus
German classicist K. Lachmann (1831)
von Tischendorf (1872)
Westcott & Hort (1881) – used for UBS

13. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
5824 Greek mss. and counting... (Wallace 2013)
Criteria for choosing the original reading
Appx Greek manuscripts (mss.)*
No one manuscript is identical
How many variants?
[GNT app. 140,000 words**]
c. 400,000 variants (Wallace 2010)
Lots of variants because lots of
manuscripts
Greek NT mss.:
- Gospels: app. 2000
- Paul: app. 850
- Acts & Gen Ep: 650
- Revelation: 325
*Only 60 of these cover the entire NT
**Depends on which GNT is being used: Textus receptus has more words than NA and UBS.

14. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
What is a “textual variant”?
Any type of variant – single letter, transposition of words
Any deviant wording/letter from autograph = variant
 Which ones are significant variants?
Examples of textual variants and types
70% of variants grammatical – vast majority
E.g. movable “nu”
“John” [+other proper names] – spelling and use of article etc.
Word order (transposition)

15. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
How to write “John loves Mary” in Greek?
1) Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ Μαρίαν
2) Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ τὴν Μαρίαν
3) ὁ Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ Μαρίαν
4) ὁ Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ τὴν Μαρίαν
5) Μαρίαν Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ
6) τὴν Μαρίαν Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ
7) Μαρίαν ὁ Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ
8) τὴν Μαρίαν ὁ Ἰωάννης ἀγαπᾷ
 + another 8x (start with ἀγαπᾷ) + variant spellings of “John” [x2] and “Mary” [x3] – totals 96x in Greek*
Each means “John loves Mary” – some (not all) with slightly different emphases
*Wallace 2014 – number increases to 300+ with various conjunctions and over 1000 if one uses different word for “love”.

16. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Conclusion about textual variants:
Max. of 1% of the actual text in doubt [1400 words]
Vast majority of the 400,00 variants are of no significance
What matters is the nature of variants
Mostly unintentional scribal errors
Which are meaningful and viable – see later
“No cardinal doctrine [i.e. about salvation] is jeopardized by any viable variant” (Wallace 2010)
How to decide the original reading?
Generally accepted criteria
Probability

17. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
(a) External Criteria
i.) The Date and character of the witnesses
The earlier the better [generally]
Character of the type of text it embodies
ii) Geographical distribution of witnesses
Concurrence of witnesses from various locales
E.g. Alexandrian, Caesarean, western etc.

18. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
iii.) The genealogical relationship of texts & families
Compare the following
Two 11th century mss can be traced to a 4th century ms
35 9th century mss traced to a 7th ms
iv.) Witnesses are weighted rather than counted
See the above example

19. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
(b) Internal Criteria – probabilities
i.) The habits of the scribes & paleographical features
More difficult reading preferred
Shorter reading preferred
Verbal dissidence over harmony [tendency to harmonize]
ii.) What the author would likely have written
Style and vocabulary
Context – immediate and wider
Harmony and usage elsewhere by the author

20. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
3.1 How to use modern GNT versions?
The Versions
NA 28 (2012) (NA27, NA 26…)
Scholars, professors, pastors
UBS 5th Ed. (2014) (4th, 3rd, 2nd…)
Bible translators [identical text w/ NA 28; tiny apparatus]
SBL GNT (Holmes, st ed.)
Free and widely available
“alternative” to NA & UBS – small apparatus
Based on 4 earlier GNT editions (WH, Byz, NIV, Tregelles)

21. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Novum Testamentum Graece
1st Novum Testamentum Graece (NTG) 1898 by E. Nestle
Used three leading editions of the time
Rudimentary apparatus (only Codex Bezae)
13th Edition (1927) w/ first critical apparatus
Apparatus from secondary sources (esp. von Soden)
25th ed. (1963) – primary sources from Church Fathers
Followed majority text largely
NTG 26th ed. (1979) & UBS 3rd ed. (1975)
First editions to reflect textual criticism of 20th century

22. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
NA 25th and 26th ed. – identical text but revision of apparatus in 26th ed.
NA 28th ed. & Editio Critica Maior (ECM)
Revised apparatus throughout NT (also digital format)
1st and 2nd order distinction removed
Conjectures (cj) removed from apparatus etc.
Revised text to catholic epistles
E.g. Jam 1:20, 2:3, 2:4, 2:15 etc.
Largely similar critical signs (some exceptions)
◊ to indicate “undecided”

23. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Most commonly acknowledged textual problems
Mark 16:9-20 (5 different endings)
12 verses (“long ending” – most common)
John 7:53-8:11
12 verses
 Only two lengthy sections that are textually suspect
1 John 5:7-8 (Comma Johanneum)
Not in Erasmus’ 1516 or 1519 versions – only in 3rd ed. (1522)

24. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
3.2 Practical example
Digging into the use of NA 28
Sections of NA 28
Critical signs, symbols
Critical apparatus
Three types of Greek ms witnesses based on quality & frequency of citation in the apparatus (pp )
Consistently cited [esp. papyri, uncials & some minuscules]
Frequently cited [minuscules etc.]
Occasionally cited (only Appendix I)

25. Tiny critical apparatus
UBS 5th Edition
Tiny critical apparatus

26. Detailed critical apparatus Text-critical symbols in text
Cross references to OT, NT, Apocrypha
NA28th Edition
Detailed critical apparatus
Text-critical symbols in text

27. Any theological difference?
Textual Examples
Rom 5:1
ἔχομεν OR εχωμεν?
Original reading?
The difference?
Grammar?
Ind. Or subj.
Meaning?
“We have peace”
“Let us have peace”

28. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Further Textual Examples
Mark 1:2
Acts 20:28

29. Textual Criticism and Manuscripts
Useful websites for textual criticism
- evangelical website by D. Wallace
– “grandfather” of textual research
- evangelical textual criticism website
– Further links