Rethinking New Testament Textual Criticism

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Sep 2003 by Cox, Steven L

Rethinking New Testament Textual Criticism. Edited by David Alan Black. Grand Rapids; Baker, 2002, 157 pp., $16.99 paper.

Rethinking New Testament Textual Criticism explores biblical textual criticism and introduces current issues in the field of textual studies. This work was based on a symposium held at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, NC in 2000.

In the first chapter, "Issues in New Testament Textual Criticism: Moving from the Nineteenth Century to the Twenty-First Century," Eldon Jay Epp surveys the history of textual criticism, placing importance on "internal" and "external" evidence and describing especially the rigorous eclectic and the reasoned eclectic approaches to textual criticism. This section explains the establishment of text-types for the purpose of reconstructing "the history of the New Testament text by tracing the lines of transmission back through the extant manuscripts to the earliest stages and then selecting the readings that seem best to represent the earliest attainable level of textual tradition" (p. 35). Epp also surveys and evaluates the critical texts and emphasizes the influence of Westcott and Hort's work on critical editions of the past two centuries.

Michael Holmes in "The Case for Reasoned Eclecticism" defends the reasoned eclecticism approach, which encompasses both internal and external evidence concerning ancient manuscripts. He provides a detailed definition of this text-critical approach and offers a comparison with the other approaches taken by the presenters at the symposium. Holmes acknowledges that the various methodologies "too often attempt to make decisions about specific variations on the basis of a few overarching rules or general guidelines" (p. 89). He argues that "no critical methodology . . . works in a vacuum; it functions only in conjunction with a view of the history of the transmission of the text" (p. 91). Holmes concludes with an established list of points by which one might understand the history of the text.

J. K. Elliott in "The case for Thoroughgoing Eclecticism" seeks to demonstrate the use of only internal evidence to determine a manuscript's trustworthiness. Elliott provides the definition of his methodology (p. 103) and demonstrates how proponents of thoroughgoing eclecticism differ from those following other methodologies, in particular the proponents of Byzantine priority. He cautions that "in many ways the results of the three methods do not differ in all respects [in regard to principle and praxis]" (p. 104). Elliott calls for a consistency in methodology, giving examples of the UBS committee's inconsistency. Elliott also demonstrates the application of thoroughgoing eclecticism with select texts. Throughout these texts, he seeks to recognize and restore consistency of words, to harmonize parallel passages, to make paleographical considerations, and to consider each variant on its own merits. Elliott then focuses on the historical development and characteristics of manuscripts. He concludes, "Thoroughgoing textual criticism should be concerned not only with establishing as far as possible the original words of the original authors; it should try to explain the likeliest direction of change and why secondary texts arose" (p. 124).

Maurice A. Robinson in "The Case for Byzantine Priority" argues that "the original text can be recovered primarily from the consensus agreement of vast amounts of manuscripts that comprise what is termed the 'Byzantine Textform'" (p. 126). According to Robinson, the eclectics evaluate "only a small number of sequential variant units . . . [whereas,] if one were to follow the aggregate testimony of all manuscripts over those same sequential variant units, one would find that a continual degree of support remains, and that support is found primarily among the Byzantine witnesses" (p. 127). Robinson is careful to list principles of internal and external evidence, followed by excellent, detailed descriptions of each. However, Robinson's method, in essence, stacks the deck with a methodology that is biased in favor of the Byzantine text, rather than offering a complete evaluation of all NT manuscripts. Though Robinson offers clear and concise arguments, he makes some conclusions based on "presumptive evidence" and supposition (p. 137).

Moises Silva provides the final chapter in this book. Silva commends the work and contributions of Hort with regard to textual criticism, for his synthesis and articulation of "nineteenth century text-critical scholarship, which was itself the culmination of intensive work tracing its lineage back to Bengel in the eighteenth century, Bentley in the seventeenth century, and Erasmus in the sixteenth century" (p. 142). In light of Hort's work, Silva evaluates the contributions of the presenters at the symposium, primarily Holmes, Elliott, and Robinson.

One problem with this work is that the chapters are imbalanced. The first chapter represents nearly fifty percent of the text; whereas, Robinson's chapter is so condensed that pertinent information seems left out (see p. 126, n. 2). In conclusion, this work is not designed to replace the introductions to NT textual criticism by Metzger or by the Alands; however, it serves as an excellent supplement.