|
|
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{FairMormon}} | + | {{Main Page}} |
| | <onlyinclude> | | <onlyinclude> |
| − | ==Question: What can textual criticism tell us about the Bible?==
| + | #REDIRECT[[Textual criticism of the Bible]] |
| − | ===The flaws in the Biblical text present a problem to those who believe the Bible is without error, but not to Latter-day Saints===
| |
| − | | |
| − | What can textual criticism tell us about the Bible? Does it have anything to say about [[Biblical_inerrancy|the Bible being without error]], as some Christians claim?
| |
| − | | |
| − | Most Latter-day Saints are not interested in searching the Bible for errors, or highlighting its flaws, though they readily admit that ''no text'' can be perfect or without error when mortals are involved in writing, transcribing, transmitting, or translating it. (See Book of Mormon—[http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bm/introduction Introduction].)
| |
| − | | |
| − | The flaws in the Biblical text present a problem to those who believe the Bible is without error, but not to Latter-day Saints. Some additions or removals might have been corrections that came from earlier unknown sources (see the example for {{b||Hebrews|1|3}} above in this page, and "[[Book_of_Mormon_textual_changes/%22Words_missing_in_Alma_32:30%22|Words missing in Alma 32:30]]" as an illustration), but still in a scholarly point of view, it is evident that the Bible has been changed many times and contains errors.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehrman Bart Ehrman] was a Biblical inerrantist when he entered the study of the New Testament (he started off at the very conservative Moody Bible Institute), but ultimately lost his faith over the 200,000 to 400,000 variant New Testament readings.<ref>The estimate is Ehrman's; see {{MisquotingJesus1|start=89}}</ref> As he wrote, "There are more variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament."<ref>{{MisquotingJesus1|start=90}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Ehrman's slide into agnosticism illustrates the dangers of inerrantism. His inability to have complete confidence that every word of the Bible was correct led to an inability to trust ''any'' of the Bible's witness about Jesus as Lord, Son of God, and Savior.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Latter-day Saints do not rely on scripture—biblical or otherwise—for their knowledge of Christ. They rely instead upon that which provided the scripture in the first place: revelation by the Holy Ghost. They treasure the scriptural witnesses, but do not require perfection from any mortal or mortal work to have faith in the revelations of God.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Textual criticism is a branch of philology or bibliography that is concerned with the identification and removal of errors from texts and manuscripts===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Let's begin by defining "textual criticism":
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | ''Textual criticism'' or ''lower criticism'' is a branch of philology or bibliography that is concerned with the identification and removal of errors from texts and manuscripts. Ancient manuscripts often have errors or alterations made by scribes, who copied the manuscripts by hand. The textual critic seeks to determine the original text of a document or a collection of documents, which the critic believes to come as close as possible to a lost original....<ref>"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Textual_criticism&oldid=156362137 Textual criticism]," ''Wikipedia'' (accessed 11 September 2007).</ref>
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | "Criticism" in this case does not mean "faultfinding." It's a technical term referring to the methods of studying texts or documents for the purpose of dating or reconstructing them, evaluating their authenticity, and analyzing their content or style.<ref>Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1), Random House, Inc., s.v. "[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/criticism criticism]" (accessed 11 September 2007).</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Latter-day Saints reject both Biblical inerrancy and Biblical infallibility===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Many fundamentalist Christians believe [[Biblical inerrancy|the Bible is ''inerrant'' or ''infallible'']]. They reject the possibility that the Bible could have errors. For many inerrantists this belief only applies to the original manuscripts of the Bible as written by their authors; some, however, believe that infallibility extends to modern printed Bibles or to a specific translation of the Bible.<ref>For further reading, see the Wikipedia articles on "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inerrancy Biblical inerrancy]" and "[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_infallibility Biblical infallibility]".</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Latter-day Saints reject both Biblical inerrancy and Biblical infallibility. They believe that no book of scripture is "perfect" (in any definition of the word) because, although it contains the will of God, it is communicated through the writings of fallible human beings. This includes not only the Bible, but also the Book of Mormon and other modern scriptures.<ref>}The authors of the Book of Mormon disclaim inerrancy/infallibility at least five separate times: [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bm/ttlpg Title Page] ("And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men"); {{s|1|Nephi|19|6}}; {{s||Mormon|8|17}}; {{s||Mormon|9|31-33}}; {{s||Ether|12|23-26}}.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Latter-day Saints also claim that the Bible has undergone many changes since it was written. Joseph Smith taught:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors.<ref>{{TPJS1|start=327}}</ref>
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The LDS Church does not take any position on which verses in the Bible are accurate and which are not. From a point of faith we use the Bible as a spiritual guide and don't try to pick it apart. Textual criticism is the realm of the scholar. The Church is an institute of faith and revelation, not scholarship.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===From the scholarly point of view, the differences in various Biblical manuscripts are well-documented===
| |
| − | | |
| − | A few well-known variants include:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''{{s||John|7|53}}-{{s||John|8|1-11}}''', traditionally known as the ''pericope adulterae'', is not contained in the earliest and best manuscripts and was almost certainly not an original part of the Gospel of John. Among modern commentators and textual critics, it is a foregone conclusion that the section is not original but represents a later addition to the text of the Gospel. Critical text scholar Bruce Metzger summarizes: "The evidence for the non-Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress is overwhelming."<ref>Bruce M. Metzger, ''A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament'' (United Bible Societies; 2nd Revised edition, 2005), 187.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''{{s||Mark|16|9-20}}''' does not exist in the earliest and best manuscripts. Virtually all scholars believe it was a later addition, added by scribes who felt the original ending was unsatisfactory.
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''{{s|1|Jn|5|7-8}}''' — "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth" — the infamous ''Comma Johanneum'', is accepted as a later insertion by virtually every scholar. It is most interesting that it is the only explicit reference to [[Godhead and the Trinity|the Trinity]] in the New Testament, yet it is not part of the original epistle, but dates from probably the fourth century.
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''{{s||Matthew|5|22}}''' The phrase "without a cause" appears in some early manuscripts and some writings of early church fathers, but this phrase does not appear in the earliest manuscript (Papyrus 67 dated AD 125-150) nor in the earliest church father writing (Justin dated about 165 AD) of Matthew 5:22. Virtually all scholars believe that this phrase was added by the third century. (It is notable that this phrase is in the King James Bible but it is not in the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith Translation of Matthew 5:22.)<ref>Daniel K. Judd and Allen W. Stoddard, "Adding and Taking Away 'Without a Cause' in Matthew 5:22," in ''How the New Testament Came to Be'', ed. Kent P. Jackson and Frank F. Judd Jr. (Provo and Salt Lake City: Religious Studies Center and Deseret Book, 2006), 157-174. ISBN 1590386272.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''{{s||John|1|18}}''' is notoriously difficult because various manuscripts read either ''monogenes theos'' ("the only God") or ''ho monogenes huios'' ("the only son").
| |
| − | | |
| − | * '''{{s||Hebrews|1|3}}''' reads "reveals (''phaneron'') all things" in the Codex Vaticanus, while most manuscripts read "sustains (''pheron'') all things". This is particularly interesting because there's a scribe's marginal note in the ''CV'' that reads "Fool and knave, leave the old reading, don't change it!", indicating contention over an intentional change in the passage.
| |
| − | | |
| − | (Additional variant readings can be found on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textual_criticism#Findings Wikipedia's article on textual criticism].)
| |
| − | | |
| − | </onlyinclude>
| |
| − | {{endnotes sources}}
| |
| − | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
| |
| − | [[en:Question: What can textual criticism tell us about the Bible?]]
| |
| − | [[es:Pregunta: ¿Qué nos puede decir la crítica textual sobre la Biblia?]]
| |
| − | [[fr:La Sainte Bible et le mormonisme/La critique textuelle]]
| |
| − | [[it:La Sacra Bibbia e il mormonismo/La critica testuale]]
| |
| − | [[pt:Pergunta: O que pode a crítica textual nos dizer sobre a Bíblia?]]
| |
