The Bible is an extraordinary document: It was written over a period of 1500 years, in three different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek), by 40 different authors from very different walks of life including kings, peasants, fishermen, a herdsman, a doctor, scholars, etc. Yet in spite of such diverse conditions and the discussion of such controversial issues as the nature of God, the nature of man, the problem of evil, and others, there is a marvellous unity and continuity of though throughout.
In the 20th Century, many Biblical affirmations have been supported by psychological, archaeological, and historical research. In spite of this, the Bible has been ignored and maligned by believer and unbeliever, often leading to misconceptions.
One of the more common misconceptions of the Bible is that over the centuries it has been changed either on pupose or by accident such that we no longer know what the originals said. It is this misconception that we will discuss, and in particular as it relates to the New Testament.
When Was It Written?
To begin, the New Testament is composed of 27 individual works called “books”. Five of these books are historical narratives (the four gospels and Acts). One is apocalyptic (Revelation), a symbolic vision of the end of the world. The other twenty-one are didactic in the form of letters written to individuals or the churches.
It is helpful to note when these books were written. F. F. Bruce, one of the foremost scholars of Biblical criticism, dates the four gospels as follows: Matthew, 70-80 AD; Mark, the early 60s; Luke, the late 60s; and John, 90-100 AD. The 13 books written by the apostle Paul date from 48-64 AD. (1)
Some wonder, since Jesus was crucified around 30 AD, why did the early Christians wait 30 to 60 years to write the accounts of his life? A simple explanation is that Jesus spoke very clearly of his return to his disciples. The disciples interpreted this to mean shortly after his resurrection and ascension.
They were thinking only in terms of a few years and certainly not in terms of many decades or centuries. If Jesus were to return in a few years there would be no need to make a written record. But when Jesus’ disciples started to be executed and die, several of the remaining disciples and their close associates undertook the task of writing the story of Jesus’ life, before all of the eyewitnesses were gone.
Ancient Manuscripts
With this background, we turn again to the question of change. What do the ancient manuscripts reveal about the transmission of the New Testament through the centuries?
In museums in Europe, the Mid-East, and North America, there exists just over 250 partial or complete papyri and manuscripts of the Greek New Testament dating from 130 AD through 700 AD. The oldest virtually complete document is the Chester Beatty Papyri dated at 250 AD. Apart from these there are an additional 5000+ Greek manuscripts dating from 700 to the 1500s. (2)
Compare this wealth of documentation for the New Testament to that of other works of classical antiquity below (3):
|
Document
|
# of Manuscripts
|
Date Written
|
Date of Earliest Copy or Portion
|
Time Span (years)
|
|
Caesar's Gaelic Wars
|
10
|
58 - 50 BC
|
900 AD
|
950
|
|
History of Herodotus
|
8
|
480 - 425 BC
|
900 AD
|
1300
|
|
Roman History of Livy
|
20
|
59 BC - 17 AD
|
after 300 AD
|
350
|
|
New Testament
|
5250+
|
48 - 100 AD
|
125 & 250 AD
|
35 & 160
|
|
History of Tacitus
|
2
|
100 AD
|
800 AD
|
700
|
|
History of Thacydides
|
8
|
460 - 400 BC
|
900 AD
|
1300
|
Manuscripts Compared
One might say that it is nice to have a lot of manuscripts, but how different are they from one another? Is there any evidence of change over time?
When all 5,250+ manuscripts are compared, a total of about 100,000 variants are found. At first glance 100,000 seems like a large number, but this includes misspellings, changes in word order of a sentence, the omission or inclusion of the Greek definite article with proper names, and other minor variants. When all the minor variants are eliminated that do not affect the sense of meaning of a passage, we are left with only 235 variants of any significance. Of these there are only 5 which bring into question the genuineness of a part of the text. Here is a list of the 5 passages in question: Mark 16:9-20, Luke 22:20, 22:43-44, 23:34, and John 7:53-8:11. (4)
What does this abundant documentation mean? Through the work of textual criticism, the art and science of reconstructing the original from the multiplicity of manuscripts, it can be safely concluded that the composite Greek text from which the major English and French translations are made is essentially that which was written in the first century.
The Biblical scholar, Sir Francis Kenyon, wrote: “The interval between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant (still existing) evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.” (5)
It is important to note that modern English translations are not made through a comparison of previous translations but through a careful study of this composite Greek text know to scholars as the “Nestle Greek Text”.
The Evidence of Philology and Geography
Besides the manuscript evidence which shows that the New Testament is a first century document, there are two other fields of study which bring us to the same conclusion.
All living languages undergo constant changes in vocabulary and popular expressions. At the time the Greek New Testament was written koiné Greek was a living language undergoing slow transformation. A study of the vocabulary, phrases, and grammar of the New Testament in comparison with other Greek writings of earlier, the same and later time periods shows that the New Testament must have been written in the first century and before 200 A.D., by which time the Greek language had changed substantially.
The last line of evidence is geographical in nature. The writers of the four gospels show a personal acquaintance with Hebrew culture and with the geography of Israel and Jerusalem of the first century. For example John fixes the location of certain places in the city of Jerusalem with such accuracy that he must have been familiar with the city before its destruction in 70 A.D. by the Roman legions. A writer in the 2nd century would not have had access to such knowledge which we have only been able to verify this century through archaeological excavations.
Conclusions
What can we conclude from all of this? We must remember that the New Testament is not simply a moral, religious, and philosophical document but that it is also a history. Those who said 50 years ago that the New Testament was written after the 1st century have been proven to be wrong. Those who say today that the New Testament has been significantly altered or changed through the centuries have no legitimate proof of this claim. In fact, all the documentation and research thus far shows that it has indeed not been changed.
When you pick up a copy of an English translation of the New Testament, you can be confident that it is based on a Greek text that has been attested as genuinely first century in origin and that it was written either by eyewitnesses to the events or their direct associates.
-
F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Document: Are They Reliable?, (Eerdmans, 1943), 14th reprinting, 1980, p. 12.
- Norman L. Geisler & William Nix, A General introduction to the Bible, (Moody Press, 1968), footnote30, p. 285.
- Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, (Here’s Life Publishers, 1972), 2nd Printing, 1979, p. 42.
- Sir Frederic G. Kenyon. The Bible and Archaeology, (Harper & Row, 1940), p. 288.
- John W. Wenham, Christ and the Bible, (Intervarsity Press, 1973), p. 191-193.
Robert Montgomery lives in Gatineau, Quebec and works with the Christian Embassy of Canada.
Related Reading:
