Sunday, March 20, 2011 pm
CAN WE COUNT ON THE BIBLE WE HAVE? (6)The Transmission and Reliability
of the Text
We are in the midst of a study dealing with the integrity of the
text of our Bibles. This is
an important study as we live in a society that continually and more
frequently is assaulting the validity of the Bible as the word of God.
Therefore, we are attempting to show proofs, both internally and
externally, to instill confidence that what we do have (the 66 books
that comprise the Old and New Testaments) IS indeed God’s intended
message for mankind for all ages.
It is THE text for which we need to reverently respect its
boundaries (1 Cor. 4:6). We
have “all things that pertain to life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1:3) and
“the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3)
Thus far, we have examined inspiration and we have established
the canon of both the Old and New Testaments.
The canon is reference to the compilation of books which are
considered authoritatively the word of God.
In our study we have noted both the books that were accepted and
why AND those books which have been rejected by THE MAJORITY (known as
the apocrypha) and why. With
confidence we can know what books belong in the canon.
BUT HOW DO WE KNOW THAT WHAT WE POSSESS IS THE COMPLETE AND
INERRANT WORD OF GOD? In 1989, Shirley MacClaine was being interviewed
by Larry King about her New Age beliefs.
When a caller challenged her views by appealing to the New
Testament, her comment was that the Bible has been translated and
changed so many times in 2000 years that we cannot have confidence in
its accuracy. Larry King
agreed saying, “everybody knows that.” Sadly, her view is not all that
uncommon. In fact, if you
speak to the average critic of scripture he will say
In our lesson tonight we shall
see that what we possess is NOT the autographs of these letters, but
copies and translations. One
might argue that since what we have is not the originals, that in the
process of translation, the teachings of scripture have been corrupted
and we cannot rely upon the message today as being inerrant.
a.
IT
begins with faith –
Heb. 11:6, 3. The truth of
serving God is that it starts with one’s faith.
And after all is said and done, we accept what we believe by
faith. We must have faith
that God has revealed to us what He intends for us to have.
That is not a blind faith that accepts anything, but it is a
confident trust in Him.
NEVERTHELESS, it is not unreasonable to “trust but verify”.
After all, your eternal destiny is the concern.
In Judges 6:36-40 we read about Gideon, one of Israel’s judges
(deliverers). On the
occasion recorded, the angel of the Lord appeared to him to deliver
Israel. Gideon asked for a
sign, TWICE, to verify that the Lord would deliver Israel at His hand.
God gave Him the signs he requested.
The POINT I am making here is that while God expects us to follow
Him by faith, He does not expect us to BLINDLY follow Him.
He has given us evidence to weigh when it comes to His word.
Just as we have shown proof that the books we have in the canon are what
belongs, we need to examine the evidence for the accuracy of the text we
possess.
b.
What happened to the originals?
The truth is we don’t know.
But understand that the materials upon which they were written were
perishable AND widely circulated.
Therefore, wear and the elements would take their toll.
Even the oldest of documents that we now possess demonstrate this
wear. It is
interesting that some of the documents we have now are missing the
beginning or the end of pages – which is natural.
Also, perhaps God did not want us to have the originals.
Considering the tendency of our
religious world to make holy relics out of things (i.e. the bronze
serpent – 2 Kings 18:4; the many relics of Catholicism such as the
crucifix, statues, and whatever they have of antiquity).
What would they do with the originals of the text of the Bible?
Could it be that what is important to God is the message NOT the
vessel that delivers the message (cf. Acts 17:24,25).
Deut. 13:14 noted that Israel was reminded that the word of God
was very near them, in their mouth and in their heart (Also Rom. 10:8).
c.
Textual criticism – is the
process of examining text by a given set of criteria used to determine
the character (dating, accuracy, etc.) and authenticity of any ancient
work. It includes examining
multiple copies of a work or portion thereof, especially when we do not
have the original, and working to restore the original as accurately as
possible.
When it comes to ancient works, NO work has been copied or documented
more and has anywhere close to the number of documents we have
associated with the Bible, especially the New Testament.
d.
Types of materials
i.
Scrolls &
Codex – codex is a fancy name for a book form.
Pages that are bound together.
During the 1st century AD, such began to develop.
The majority of what we have concerning the New Testament is
codices as opposed to scrolls.
ii.
Surfaces -
vellum, parchments, papyrus, etc.
e.
Why
the written text?
Because oral transmissions can more easily be misrepresented or
perverted. I was told while
growing up, “Be careful what you write”.
What you say can be retracted more easily than what you write.
Writing is a more permanent record (though now, we record
lessons).
II.
The Manuscript evidence
a.
Textual
evidence is NOT the result of “linear” transmission (i.e. a straight
line; a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy…).
i.
The flaw
of the “telephone game” analogy is two fold: 1) It relies on linear
transmission – one person speaks to one person who speaks to another
person, etc. If ONE person
doesn’t hear the expression properly, all the following receptors now
have a flawed interpretation.
2) The message is transmitted orally.
Oral transmission is much more likely to be flawed than that
which is written for many reasons – you may not think when you speak, it
is what comes to mind as a first response and, sometimes when it is
repeated it is not exactly the same (i.e. paraphrased), and many other
reasons.
ii.
To
construct manuscripts from which Bible translations are developed,
scholars have at their disposal more than 5300 Greek manuscripts of
different types.
iii.
In
addition to this, they also have early translations into other languages
– Latin, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, etc.
iv.
And there
are quotes from other works that appeal to scripture.
We will speak more about these as this lesson progresses.
b.
The Old
Testament –
i.
Until the
discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1948, the earliest
complete manuscripts of the Old Testament dated around 1000 AD.
They included:
1.
The
Leningrad Codex around 1008
AD, which is the oldest COMPLETE Old Testament.
2.
The
Cairo Codex which dated around
895 AD, included most of the written prophets (except Daniel) and what
is described as “the former prophets” which included the books of
Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings.
3.
The
Leningrad Codex of the Prophets,
dating AD 916 which contained the altter prophets.
4.
British
Museum Codex of the Pentateuch,
around 10th or 11th century.
5.
These
documents were the basis of all manuscripts upon which the Old Testament
was translated.
ii.
With such
a length of time between the originals (between 2500 and 1900 years) and
relatively few manuscripts, how can we know the Old Testament documents
are accurate?
1.
First,
consider the Jewish scribal trade – the Jews took translating scriptures
very seriously. We
know that because it survived the wars and trauma of OT history.
2.
Because
the Jews considered copies of the text to be sacred they took extreme
care as they made copies.
This included:[1]
a.
Scribes
would sit in full Jewish dress after bathing (reverence for the task)
b.
They used
a certain type of ink
c.
The
spacing of words and letters was strictly regulated
d.
Lines and
letters were meticulously counted
e.
IF a
manuscript was found to have even one error it was destroyed.
3.
The
Massoretes were instrumental in preserving the text from about 500 AD to
1000 AD. It is their works
that we have mentioned above.
They were meticulous in avoiding copying mistakes and scribal
errors. In addition to
respecting the rules mentioned above, they developed a system of
numbering verses, words and letters that helped verify a manuscript was
completely accurate. They
were also instrumental in developing vowel points which help us
accurately say Hebrew words.
4.
The reason
we have so few manuscripts and so late manuscripts for the Hebrew Old
Testament is their reverence for their work.
As noted, they would destroy copies with errors.
BUT, they would also ceremonially bury texts that were old or had
become worn out.
5.
The Dead
Sea Scrolls – discovered in 1940s by a boy throwing rocks into caves in
Qumran when he heard something break.
It was a clay picture containing a leather scrolls.
When they were found they contained substantial portions of the
Old Testament including complete copies of Isaiah and Gen-Deut., Psalms,
etc. and fragments which come from every book of the Old Testament
except Esther. other works
(including some apocryphal books and commentaries, and numerous other
works). These manuscripts
dated around 100 BC by the Essenes.
What is remarkable is that when a comparison was done with one of
the Isaiah scrolls found there and the
earlier manuscripts mentioned above and others.
As an example, Isaiah 53 was examined which has 166 words in it.
In that chapter there were discovered 17 differences of which 10
were matters of spelling, 4 were stylistic changes and 3 were letters
that comprised a word in vs. 11 (“light”) which was added to what it was
compared with.[2]
In essence, the errors were overwhelmingly what we would call
today, “typos”. IT verified
the accuracy of the text of the Old Testament and the methods used to
preserve it.
6.
The Latin
Vulgate, was a Latin translation of the entire Bible composed by Jerome
around 400 AD. He used the
Hebrew text to translate the Old Testament.
There are other similar documents available to us. We do not have the
“autograph” but we do have copies dating to the 8th century.
Again, variations are minimal.
7.
ALSO, do
NOT forget the substantial references to the Old Testament quoted in the
New Testament. They help to
verify the accuracy of the text as well as the Canon.
8.
With this
we can have GREAT confidence in the text of the Old Testament.
c.
The New
Testament – is much more
remarkable and determined by a different set of criteria.
1st – the time between the originals and available documents
is much less; 2nd – the overwhelming amount of early
documents we have at our disposal.
i.
We have as
of 1980 at least 5366 2nd – 15th century Greek
manuscripts. Most manuscripts we have are in codex form (an early word
for a book). Because of the
size of all the books of the NT, most early manuscripts were not
complete, but many were grouped
into 1)The four gospels; 2)General epistles & Acts; 3)Paul’s
letters including Hebrews & 4) Revelation.
In addition to these Greek manuscripts, there are also more than 19000
other manuscripts in Syriac, Coptic, Latin and Aramaic.
ii.
Types of
manuscripts include:
1.
Papyrus – the material the New
Testament was actually written on, either scrolls or in book form.
Papyrus was invented by the
Egyptians using reeds. It
formed a quality paper. Some
of the earliest fragments of the New Testament are in this form.
Included is a fragment named P52 which contains a portion of John
18:31-34 & 37-38 which is dated around 110-125 AD.
We also have several other such manuscripts.
2.
Uncials –
manuscripts with all capital Greek letters which were written either on
papyrus (the paper mentioned above), parchments or vellum (types of
animal skins converted into writing surfaces).
These dated from the 3rd to the 8th
centuries AD. (NOTE: The
type of lettering in a manuscript helps us to date it).
We have about 300 uncial manuscripts including the complete Codex
Sinaticus (about 340 AD) and the almost complete Codex Alexandrinus
(about 450 AD). This
provides our earliest complete documents that would be given greater
weight because of its closeness to the actual dates of origin.
3.
Miniscules
– were manuscripts generally developed from the 9th century
and beyond. They are the
largest portion of manuscripts we have.
There are about 2795 manuscripts and another 1964 lectionaries
(books written that contained specific scriptures to be read by the
church).
4.
All of
these documents are considered (or those available) when generating a
manuscript that will be used at the foundation of a Bible.
iii.
Other
“witnesses” included lectionaries which contained considerable portions
of scripture, versions of the Bible as it was translated into various
languages, etc. In these we
find plenty of passages of scripture that can be compared to others.
iv.
The early
“church fathers” – They frequently quoted from the New Testament as they
wrote their letters. In
face, it has been said that virtually all of the New Testament is quoted
in these works. In fact, one
author noted that even if we did not have manuscripts we could compile
scripture just by the writings of early theologians and other writers.
We have more than 36,000 NT quotes from these writings.
[3]
v.
In
summary, the text of the New Testament was compiled from documents so
extensive that it would be IMPOSSIBLE to perpetrate a fraudulent
document and have it believable.
There is too much other evidence for such to be possible.
In our next lesson
we will continue to examine the reliability of the text by noting
textual variations (differences).