What is the Critical Text?
The Critical Text refers to the Greek New Testament that seeks to reconstruct the original wording of the New Testament books. It is based on ancient Greek manuscripts and attempts to remove errors and variants that were introduced over the centuries of copying.
History of the Critical Text
In the early centuries of Christianity, the New Testament was copied by hand and circulated among churches. This manual copying process inevitably led to some errors and variations being introduced into the text. As the number of copies increased, so did the number of textual variants.
In the 16th century, with the advent of the printing press, an authoritative printed Greek New Testament was sought. The Textus Receptus (“Received Text”) published by Erasmus in 1516 was based on a handful of late medieval manuscripts. It became the basis for many translations including the King James Version.
Over time, many more ancient Greek manuscripts were discovered dating back to the early centuries of the church. Scholars realized that these newly found manuscripts were generally superior and closer to the original writings than the few late manuscripts that formed the basis of the Textus Receptus.
Westcott and Hort were the first to produce a critical text of the Greek New Testament in 1881 based on this expanded knowledge of manuscripts. They relied primarily on two 4th century manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, which they viewed as superior.
Later critical texts by Nestle and the United Bible Societies drew from a wider range of manuscripts and attempted to reconstruct the “original” wording using textual criticism principles. This is the approach taken to produce modern critical texts.
Principles of the Critical Text
The critical text approach relies on several key principles stemming from the field of textual criticism:
– Older manuscripts tend to be closer to the originals. More errors accumulate over time as documents are manually copied.
– More copies do not equal more accuracy. The largest number of surviving manuscripts come from the medieval period, but these contain the most errors because they are furthest removed from the originals.
– Shorter readings are preferred. Scribes tended to expand and harmonize texts over time rather than shorten them. The shorter reading is more likely to be original.
– Harder readings are preferred over easier ones. Scribes tended to “fix” problematic or confusing wordings rather than introduce new difficulties. The harder reading is more likely to be original.
– Variants that can be reasonably explained as unintentional copying mistakes are rejected in favor of more difficult readings.
– Manuscripts from different geographic regions are compared. Agreements across manuscripts from diverse areas reinforce original readings.
By applying these principles, scholars weigh the manuscript evidence to determine which readings are most likely to reflect the wording of the original writing. No one manuscript perfectly preserves the original text, so the critical text relies on comparing many witnesses.
Manuscripts Used in the Critical Text
The critical text primarily utilizes manuscripts from the Alexandrian text type, as these are generally considered among the oldest and most reliable. Key manuscripts include:
– Codex Sinaiticus (4th century): One of the earliest near-complete manuscripts discovered in the 19th century at St. Catherine’s Monastery. Written in Greek.
– Codex Vaticanus (4th century): Another early manuscript held in the Vatican library since the 15th century. Contains nearly all the New Testament in Greek.
– Codex Alexandrinus (5th century): A Greek manuscript originally from Alexandria with the majority of the Bible text.
– Papyri fragments (2nd-4th centuries): Oldest manuscript fragments showing substantial agreement with major codices. Over 100 have been found, though many are too damaged to provide continuous text.
– Minuscules: Cursive Greek manuscripts from after the 9th century. Thousands exist and are helpful for analyzing groups of texts.
The critical text also refers to some Western manuscripts in cases where the Alexandrian witnesses contain notable problems or variations. But overall the Alexandrian texts serve as the primary basis.
Differences from the Textus Receptus
The Critical Text differs from the Textus Receptus Greek New Testament in a number of passages:
– The ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20) is absent in early manuscripts and is considered inauthentic.
– The story of the adulterous woman (John 7:53-8:11) is omitted, as it does not appear in early manuscripts.
– The Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7-8) is excluded as a later addition not found in Greek manuscripts before the medieval period.
– Romans 16:25-27 is placed in Romans 14 rather than at the end of Romans.
– Many shorter phrases are omitted when not supported by the earliest texts. Examples:
Luke 22:43-44 – Christ’s sweat like blood
Luke 23:34 – Father forgive them
John 5:3b-4 – Stirring of the waters
Acts 8:37 – Ethiopian’s confession of faith
Acts 15:34 – Silas remains in Antioch
Acts 24:6b-8a – Accusations against Paul
Romans 13:9 – You shall not bear false witness
In total, there are around 5,700 differences between the critical text and the Textus Receptus used by the KJV. Most are minor, but a few dozen are more substantial.
Impact on Bible Translations
Modern Bible translations overwhelmingly rely on critical Greek texts rather than the Textus Receptus. Some examples include:
– English Standard Version (2001)
– New International Version (1978/2011)
– New American Standard Bible (1971/1995)
– New Revised Standard Version (1989)
– New Living Translation (2015)
Because these versions are based on an older form of the text, they may omit or format passages differently than the KJV. However, no major doctrines or beliefs are affected.
There are a small number of Bible versions that maintain the Textus Receptus as their Greek foundation, such as the New King James Version. But most scholars consider the critical text to be closer to the original manuscripts.
Ongoing Refinement of the Critical Text
Textual criticism is an ongoing process, and refinements continue to be made to the critical text. As more manuscripts and fragments are found, and as scholars better understand scribal habits and textual histories, new evidence may shed light on original readings.
For example, since the 1880s Westcott and Hort text, some changes have included:
– The story of the adulterous woman (John 7:53-8:11) has gained more support based on its placement in Luke rather than John in some manuscripts.
– 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is now believed by some to be an interpolation and not original to Paul’s writing.
– The long ending of Mark (16:9-20) now has stronger support for possible authenticity, though the question is not fully settled.
So while the overall methodology remains stable, the critical text continues to be refined over time as new discoveries are made. No version perfectly reproduces the originals, but the critical text provides the best attempt based on current evidence.
Arguments Against the Critical Text
Some oppose the critical text approach for theological reasons or over methodology. Arguments include:
– It relies too heavily on a small number of manuscripts, particularly Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
– It gives preference to Alexandrian text types over Byzantine/Majority texts.
– Westcott and Hort had some unconventional textual theories that are now questioned.
– It constitutes a “newer” form of the text that cannot claim agreement of the church over history.
– Differences between critical texts and Textus Receptus may cause unnecessary confusion.
– No consensus exists among scholars, so its conclusions remain tentative and unsure.
Defenders of the critical text respond that it represents the most faithful attempt to reconstruct the original Greek manuscripts by drawing from the best evidence available. No approach is perfect, but it is based on sound textual criticism principles.
Ongoing use and trust of the critical text by the vast majority of scholars supports its reliability, even if there is room for refinement as research continues. In most cases, variations do not impact core doctrines or teachings.
Conclusion
The Critical Text of the Greek New Testament is an attempt to get back as close as possible to the original writings, removing errors that accumulated over centuries of transmission. By comparing many early manuscripts, scholars can analyze textual variants to determine the most likely original readings. This text serves as the basis for nearly all modern Bible versions and continues to be refined using principles of textual criticism. While no written work can perfectly reproduce the autographs, the Critical Text represents the best scholarly attempt at reaching the earliest recoverable form of the New Testament books.