Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All
Old Testament Textual Criticism, often simply referred to as lower criticism, seeks to reconstruct the original text of biblical books by examining the variants among the existing manuscripts. This endeavor is as essential as it is complex, requiring meticulous study of ancient languages, careful handling of ancient texts, and an understanding of historical contexts.
A common challenge faced by skeptics and critics revolves around the question of the divine inspiration of the Scripture, especially considering the reality of textual variations and transmission over time. How can a text with apparent discrepancies, it is asked, be said to be divinely inspired? To delve into this query, we need to consider the nature of divine inspiration, the science of textual criticism, and the evidence of the text itself.
The doctrine of divine inspiration holds that the Bible is God-breathed, that God superintended the human authors of the Scripture so that, using their individual personalities, backgrounds, and styles, they composed and recorded without error His message to mankind. This concept, however, does not necessitate that the copies of the original manuscripts (the autographs) remained error-free. Human fallibility in the copying process does not contradict the divine infallibility of the original texts.
The absence of the original autographs is sometimes presented as a challenge to divine inspiration, but this need not be the case. Indeed, if the autographs had survived, there might have been an inappropriate veneration for those documents, detracting from the actual message. What matters most is not the physical preservation of the originals, but the safeguarding of the Divine message they carried, a task accomplished remarkably well throughout history.
Through textual criticism, scholars work to identify and correct copyist errors, ensuring the text’s fidelity to the original as much as possible. Textual criticism is a helpful tool, enabling us to trace the transmission of the text through the centuries and across various cultures and languages. The availability of a rich collection of Old Testament manuscripts, such as the Masoretic Text, the Septuagint, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Samaritan Pentateuch, provides multiple lines of transmission which can be compared and contrasted to deduce the most probable original reading.
When viewed correctly, the presence of textual variations, far from being a problem, become a valuable resource for discerning the original text. The thousands of ancient copies, even with their slight variations, overwhelmingly testify to the integrity and reliability of the Old Testament text. In fact, the variations are often minor, involving spelling, word order, or grammatical features, rarely affecting the meaning of the text or any significant doctrine.
A clear example of the remarkable textual consistency is found in the comparison of the Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered in the mid-20th century, include copies of the Old Testament books dating to a few hundred years before Christ, making them about a thousand years older than the earliest Masoretic manuscripts. Upon examination, the texts from Qumran were found to align with remarkable accuracy to the Masoretic tradition, affirming its reliability and precision in textual transmission across a millennium.
Another evidence for the divine preservation of the Scripture can be seen in the extreme care with which the ancient scribes treated the text. The Masoretes, Jewish scribes in the Middle Ages, are particularly renowned for their meticulous attention to detail. They established rigorous standards for copying, counted words and letters, and added marginal notes (Masorah) to safeguard the text. This reverence and dedication to accuracy testify to a profound conviction that they were handling the very Word of God.
Moreover, we should consider the Old Testament’s profound unity, coherence, and theological depth. Even though it was written by various authors over several centuries, the Old Testament maintains a consistent portrayal of God, a continuous narrative, and an unchanging moral standard. This coherence, which extends into the New Testament, points beyond human capability, suggesting a Divine Mind behind the Scripture.
While the precise methods of divine inspiration remain a mystery, the evidence supports the belief that the Scriptures are indeed God-breathed. The Old Testament, though preserved in human language and influenced by historical contexts, carries the unmistakable imprint of the Divine. Through textual criticism, we see the human and divine elements intertwine in the transmission of the Scripture.
Instead of undermining the divine inspiration of the Bible, textual criticism reinforces it. The process allows us to appreciate the providential care God has shown in preserving His Word throughout history. Through thousands of manuscripts, across centuries, languages, and continents, the essential message of the Old Testament has been reliably conveyed: a message of a holy God reaching out to His creation, a message that carries the unmistakable mark of divine inspiration.
Examples of Textual Variants and How a Textual Scholar Might Approach Them
1 Samuel 13:1 The Masoretic Text reads, “Saul was one year old when he became king, and he reigned two years over Israel.” This presents a problem because Saul was clearly not one year old when he became king. The Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament) omits the age entirely, and the Dead Sea Scrolls don’t preserve this verse. In this case, scholars recognize that a number may have been lost in the Hebrew text transmission. While the exact age and reign of Saul can’t be definitively determined from the available textual evidence, the context of the narrative makes clear that Saul was an adult when he began to reign, and that his reign extended significantly beyond two years.
2 Samuel 15:7 The Masoretic Text reads, “And it came to pass after forty years, that Absalom said unto the king, I pray thee, let me go and pay my vow, which I have vowed unto the LORD, in Hebron.” The phrase “forty years” seems too long, as this would exceed the total reign of David. The Septuagint provides a valuable variant here, reading “four years.” Given the historical and narrative context, “four years” makes much more sense, and most scholars agree that this is likely the original reading.
1 Kings 4:26 The Masoretic Text states that Solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots. However, the parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 9:25 says he had 4,000 stalls for his chariots and horses. The Septuagint supports the Chronicles number, reading “4,000 stalls.” Here, the process of resolving the variant involves comparing the contexts and assessing the likelihood of scribal error. Scholars often propose that a scribe copying 1 Kings inadvertently added an extra zero, and thus, the correct number should be 4,000 stalls, as listed in Chronicles and the Septuagint.
In each of these cases, scholars need to analyze the textual evidence critically, taking into account the context, the characteristics of the Hebrew language, the likelihood of particular scribal errors, and the readings of various translations. Textual criticism is as much an art as a science, requiring a delicate balance of knowledge, intuition, and experience. It’s crucial to note that while these discrepancies exist, they are relatively minor and do not affect the overall message or any significant doctrine of the Old Testament.
Why We Do Not Need the Originals
The task of Old Testament textual criticism is not dependent on finding the original physical documents, the autographs, that the authors themselves penned. Instead, its goal is to reconstruct the original wording of the biblical text as accurately as possible using the available manuscripts.
We should first acknowledge that the number and age of biblical manuscripts surpass those of any other ancient document. For the Old Testament alone, we have the Masoretic Text, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and other versions and fragments. This wealth of material, spanning several centuries and languages, allows for a comprehensive and rigorous textual comparison and analysis.
The primary method of textual criticism involves the comparison of these many versions to identify and understand the differences among them. These differences, or variants, arose as the Scriptures were copied and recopied over time. Scribes, while generally incredibly accurate and meticulous in their work, were still human and occasionally made mistakes. These could include unintentional errors like misspellings, transpositions, omissions, or additions. There may also have been intentional changes for the sake of clarity or harmonization.
When scholars encounter a textual variant, they evaluate each reading based on both its external evidence (manuscript support, age, geographical distribution) and internal evidence (fitting the author’s style and context, the likelihood of a scribe introducing the variant). The more difficult or problematic reading is often favored, as scribes were more likely to smooth out difficulties rather than introduce them.
By piecing together the most probable original readings from among the variants, scholars are, in essence, reconstructing the original text. This reconstructed text is not tied to a specific physical document that one could hold, but it represents the original words that the author penned.
While this process doesn’t deliver absolute certainty in every case, it provides a text that is very close to the original. Minor uncertainties do not impact the overall narrative or doctrine of the Bible. It is also a dynamic process, open to refinement as more manuscripts are discovered and as our understanding of languages and cultures improves.
So while we may never find the autographs themselves, textual criticism allows us to approximate their content with remarkable accuracy. This reconstructed “original text” then stands as the basis for modern translations and for our understanding of the biblical message.
Rules and Principles in the Practice of Old Testament Textual Criticism for Determining the Original Reading
The practice of Old Testament Textual Criticism, while not an exact science, operates under a set of guiding principles or rules which help scholars in their pursuit of the original text. It’s worth noting that these rules are not rigid; they are rather more like guidelines that inform the decision-making process.
Consider the quality of manuscripts, not just the quantity: While it can be tempting to follow the reading found in the most manuscripts, it’s essential to consider the quality of those manuscripts. Older or more reliable manuscripts might carry more weight than a large number of later, potentially less accurate ones.
Examine the external evidence: This involves looking at the age of the manuscripts, the geographical distribution, and the variety of text types supporting each reading. A reading found in older manuscripts, from a diverse range of locations, and across different text families, is generally more likely to be original.
Analyze the internal evidence: This includes a consideration of the author’s style and vocabulary, the context, and the harmony with the rest of the Scripture. A reading that fits better with the author’s usual style or with the immediate context is more likely to be the original.
Prefer the more difficult or unusual reading: Scribes were more likely to adjust a difficult or unusual reading to make it easier or to harmonize it with a parallel passage. So, if a particular variant seems more difficult or awkward yet has substantial manuscript support, it’s often considered to be the original.
The shorter reading is to be preferred: This principle is based on the tendency of scribes to add explanations or harmonizations rather than omit details. Thus, the shorter reading is often favored, although this rule should be applied carefully and not without considering other evidence.
Be aware of common scribal errors: Scribes could easily make mistakes such as missing out a line (homoioarcton and homoioteleuton), mistaking similar-looking letters, or incorrectly copying a word or phrase that appeared twice nearby (dittography). Recognizing these common errors can help in evaluating the variants.
Review the history of the transmission: Understanding how the text has been transmitted over time can often shed light on how a particular variant might have arisen.
Remember, these are guiding principles rather than hard-and-fast rules. Each variant must be considered on its own merits, and sometimes the decision between variants can be quite subjective. Nevertheless, these principles provide a valuable framework for scholars working in the field of Old Testament Textual Criticism.
Additional Points that Readers Might Find Helpful
Importance of Translation Study: An understanding of how translation works, especially the translation of ancient languages, can give a fuller understanding of why variants exist and how they impact modern translations of the Bible. This includes understanding that translation often involves interpretation and different translators may choose different ways to render the same Hebrew text into English or other languages.
Role of Archaeology: Archaeology plays a significant role in textual criticism by providing additional material evidence that can shed light on the cultural, historical, and linguistic contexts of the biblical text. Discoveries of ancient inscriptions, for example, can help us better understand the ancient Hebrew language and thus interpret the Old Testament text more accurately.
Scripture Interpretation: While textual criticism focuses on the text itself, it is important to remember the purpose of that text. The Scriptures were written to convey a message, and thus should be interpreted and understood within their literary, historical, and theological contexts. Textual criticism serves this broader goal of interpretation by seeking to establish the most accurate text possible.
Patience and Humility: Textual criticism is a complex field that requires a great deal of knowledge, patience, and humility. Even the most learned scholars sometimes disagree on how to evaluate the evidence or which reading should be considered original. It’s important to approach the field with a sense of humility, acknowledging the complexity and the limits of our knowledge.
Faith and Scholarship: Lastly, it’s valuable to remember that faith and scholarship are not mutually exclusive. Many who engage in the field of textual criticism do so out of a deep faith in the Scriptures. Their scholarly work, far from undermining their faith, can actually enhance it by leading to a deeper understanding of the text they hold sacred.
The field of Old Testament textual criticism is a fascinating and important area of study that serves to clarify and confirm the reliability of the biblical text. The more we learn about the ancient manuscripts, the transmission of the text, and the context in which the Scriptures were written, the better we can appreciate and understand the rich and complex revelation contained in the Old Testament.