Introduction to Exegesis

Textual Criticism Packet

for
TTNT 503 Introduction to Exegesis
Dr. Clinton E. Arnold

Introduction to Exegesis

Study Guide for Reading Metzger

First Assignment
Part I: The Materials for the Textual Criticism of the New Testament
1 The Making of Ancient Books (3-51)
Read the entire chapter carefully.
What is the difference between an majuscule (uncial) and minuscule script?
What is the difference between a scroll and a codex?
Know the following:
palimpsest
stichos (or, stichoi)
colophon
glosses
scholia
catenae
What is a lectionary?
2 Important Witesses to the Text of the New Testament (36-134)
This chapter can be read selectively by focusing on the following areas:
Carefully read the material about the Chester Beatty papyri (45, 46, 47, 52) and the Bodmer papyri (66, 72, 74, 75).
Carefully read the material about the following manuscripts and why they are important: Sinaiticus (a), Alexandrinus
(A), Vaticanus (B), and Bezae (D).
Carefully read the material about Codex Coridethi (Q), "Fam. 1" and "Fam. 13".
You will not be held responsible for the details and characteristics of the other manuscripts.
Carefully read the introductory portion to the section on the ancient versions. Then browse through the section on the
ancient versions to get a feel for the various types of versions. You will not be held responsible for the details concerning
the various manuscripts.
Carefully read the introductory portion to the Latin versions and the section on the Old Latin versions. Also read the
section on the Vulgate.
How are the Patristic quotations helpful in doing textual criticism?
Second Assignment
Part II: The History of New Testament Textual Criticism as Reflected in Printed Editions of the Greek Testament
3 The Pre-Critical Period: The Origin and Dominance of the Textus Receptus (137-164)
What is the "Textus Receptus" (TR) and what is its origin?
What were the chief criticisms of the edition of the Greek text produced by Erasmus?
Know something of Johann Albrecht Bengel's contribution to textual criticism.
Read the chapter with the goal of gaining an impression as to how the discipline of textual criticism was surfacing.
4 The Modern Critical Period: From Griesbach to the Present (165-194)
What was the contribution of Griesbach to the development of textual criticism?
Know the major tenets of the Westcott-Hort theory.
What are "text-types" and what did Westcott-Hort regard as the major text-types?
Why was the "Textus Receptus" (the basis for the King James Version) now regarded as the less reliable form of the text
of the NT?
Carefully read the material about the history of the United Bible Society's involvement in the production of editions of the
Greek New Testament (190-194).
Part III: The Application of Textual Criticism to the Text of the New Testament
5 The Origins of Textual Criticism as a Scholarly Discipline (197-204)

Introduction to Exegesis

Read generally.
6

Modern Methods of Textual Criticism (198-249)

How did Streeter advance and refine the Westcott-Hort theory?
Carefully read the section on the "Majority Text" (218-222)
Carefully read the section on "Thoroughgoing Eclecticism" (222-226)
What is the "Eclectic Method"?
What is "Conjectural Emendation"?
Carefully read the sections on "The Use of Computers" (240-246) and "Significant Ongoing Projects" (246-249)

Third Assignment
7 The Causes of Error in the Transmission of the Text of the New Testament (250-271)
Read through the various kinds of intentional and unintentional changes a scribe may be apt to make to the text of the
New Testament. (N.B. a one page handout will be provided summarizing this)
8 History of the Transmission of the Text of the New Testament (272-299)
Carefully read throug sections 1 and 2 (272-280)
9

The Practice of New Testament Textual Criticism (300-343)

Read the criteria for evaluating a textual variant (summarized on pp. 300-305).
Know the process for evaluating a textual variant (summarized on pp. 305-315).
Know the key features of various text-types described on pp. 305-315.
Read carefully Metzger's evaluation of the longer ending of Mark (pp. 322-327).
Read carefully Metzger's evaluation of the manuscript variants regarding the sending of the 70 (or, 72) in Luke 10:1, 17
(pp. 340-42).

Introduction to Exegesis

Textual Criticism Project

for NT 503-Introduction to Exegesis
Analysis of a Textual Variant
Evaluate one of the following textual variants:
John 1:18 -- Should the text read "God" or "son"?
Matthew 6:13 -- Should "for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever" be
included or omitted in the Lord's prayer?
Evaluate the variant by following the four steps given in the guidelines for the assignment. Your goal will be to
make an informed decision on which of the variants has the highest degree of probability as the original reading.
The process outlined below will help you to assess the weight of both the external and internal evidence of the
readings.
Form and Style:
Please use your computer to fill in your responses to all of the areas of analysis. The template for this
assignment is on my website.
Feel free, however, to handwrite (in a legible manner) the manuscript evidence on the chart.
When you cite the Greek, I would prefer that you use a Greek font (with accents and breathing marks).
Research:
You are required to consult at least four (4) exegetical commentaries for this assignment (one of these may
be Metzgers Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament). An example of exegetical commentaries
would be volumes that appear in the following series:
International Critical Commentary (ICC)
New International Greek Testament Commentary (NIGTC) (not all volumes are published)
Hermeneia
Word Biblical Commentary
Anchor Bible Commentary
Baker Exegetical Commentary Series (only a few volumes are published)
I would also accept the following expository commentaries:
New International Commentary Series (NICNT)
Pillar New Testament Commentary
New American Commentary (NAC)
Socio-Rhetorical Commentaries (Eerdmans)
There are also a number of stand alone volumes that would be acceptable. Check with me if you have any
questions.

The commentaries will be particularly helpful in making observations on matters pertaining to the evaluation
of the internal evidence (e.g. the authors style, potential harmonization, etc.).
Be sure to footnote the sources of your information in the paper.

Introduction to Exegesis

Name

Textual Criticism Project

Write the passage reference of the verse(s) that you worked on:

1. List all the possible readings.

List all the possible readings in Greek and provide an English translation.
Describe the implications of each reading for interpreting the text. What impact is there on the theology? How
will the reading impact how you preach or teach the passage?
1.

Reading:

Impact on interpretation:

2.

Reading:

Impact on interpretation:

3.

Reading:

Impact on interpretation:

Introduction to Exegesis

2. External Evidence
Part 1: Indicate what textual theory you find most compelling and state your three strongest reasons for holding

to this theory.

Introduction to Exegesis

Part 2: Plot the external evidence according to text-type in the following order: papyri, uncials, minuscules

(and lectionaries), versions, and church fathers. List all mss. not identified in your chart in the left margin. Begin
with the most well-attested readings.
Alexandrian
Reading #1

Reading #2

Reading #3

Reading #4

Reading #5

(Caesarean)

Western

Byzantine

Introduction to Exegesis

Part 3: Evaluate what reading the external evidence supports based on the text-critical theory that you find most

compelling.

Introduction to Exegesis

3. Assess the Internal Evidence.

Part 1: Transcriptional Probabilities. Discuss the variants under each of the following categories and indicate
which reading is most likely when the criteria are applied.
1. The more difficult reading (to the scribe) is to be preferred.

2. The shorter reading is to be preferred

(unless omission of material can be readily explained)

3. The non-harmonized reading is to be preferred.

4. Scribal tendencies to watch for. Do any of these apply to the variant you are assessing?
replacing unfamiliar word with more familiar synonym
Atticizing
smoothing (adding pronouns, conjunctions, and expletives)

Introduction to Exegesis

10

Part 2: Intrinsic Probabilities. Apply any of the relevant criteria listed below.
1. The style and vocabulary of the author in the book
2. The immediate context
3. Harmony with the usage of the author elsewhere

Are any of the following criteria relevant to explaining this set of variant readings? Explain.
Unintentional Changes
1. Errors arising from faulty eyesight
Letter of similar appearance (C E Q O); (G P T); (L I N); (D L)
Parablepsis (a looking by the side; oversight); Homoioteleuton (a similar ending of lines; Dittography (double
writing--repetition of a letter or word); Hapolography (writing a word once when it ought to be repeated);
2. Errors arising from faulty hearing
Itacism (h i u & ei oi ui h|)
3. Errors of the mind
substitution of synonyms
variations in the sequence of words
transposition of letters within a word
assimilation of wording from a parallel passage
4. Errors of judgement
incorporation of marginal notations

Introduction to Exegesis

Intentional Changes
1. Changes involving spelling and grammar
2. Harmonistic corruptions
3. Addition of natural complements and similar adjuncts
e.g. scribes 'and Pharisees'
4. Clearing up historical and geographical difficulties
5. Conflation of readings
6. Alterations made because of doctrinal considerations
7. Addition of miscellaneous details

Explain:

11

Introduction to Exegesis

12

Part 3: Draw your conclusions regarding the application of the transcriptional and intrinsic probabilities.
What reading does the internal evidence support? Why?

Introduction to Exegesis

13

4. Conclusion
On the basis of your evaluation of the external and internal evidence,
(1) indicate which reading you think is the original
(2) state the most convincing explanation for the rise of the other readings (viz. where did they come from and
why?)

(3) rate your level of confidence in the conclusion on an A - D scale

(4) state why you agree or disagree with the judgment of the editors of the UBS text:

Introduction to Exegesis

14

The Transmission of the Text

I. How the Text Was Transmitted
(1) Papyri

(2) Parchment manuscripts

(a) "Uncials"
(b) "Minuscules"

(3) Versions

(4) Patristic Quotations

The Development of Manuscript Families

Discerning the geneaological relationship of manuscripts: Manuscripts have been grouped by scholars into families of
manuscripts because of their family resemblance, i.e. they seem to perpetuate many of the same variant readings or it
could be said that they share the same distinctive readings because they share a common parent. For full descriptions, see
Metzger.
(1a) PROTO-ALEXANDRIAN TEXT. This collection of manuscripts has widely been considered as most faithfully
preserving the original. This text form was given priority in the translation of many modern versions (NASB, NIV, RSV).
This would be represented by most of the papyri and the two uncials Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Key Witnesses: (various papyri), a B
(1b) ALEXANDRIAN TEXT (also called the "EGYPTIAN TEXT"). Aland describes this group as manuscripts of a
special quality, but distinguished from Proto-Alexandrian manuscripts by the presence of secondary influences (Byzantine
readings, in his opinion).
Key Witnesses: A (except for gospels) L Y D

(2) CAESAREAN TEXT. A group of manuscripts corresponding to the type of text Origen used at Caesarea. Aland:
"manuscripts of a distinctive character with an independent text."

Introduction to Exegesis

15

Key Witnesses: Q fam 1, fam 13 28 565 700

(3) THE WESTERN TEXT. A group of Greek manuscripts of the New Testament stemming from Italy, Gaul (France), and
North Africa the earliest of which date from about 300 A.D. to 600 A.D. It is generally regarded by scholars as having a
less substantive claim to authenticity in the passages where it varies from other forms of the Greek text.
Key Witnesses: D it vg

(4) BYZANTINE TEXT (also called the KOINE, SYRIAN, or text). The manuscripts from this family are the latest but
by far the most numerous. Byzantine readings are usually smooth, clear, and full. This form of the text was distributed
widely throughout the Byzantine empire from the capital city Byzantium, or Constantinople (modern day Istanbul, Turkey).
This text was given priority in the King James Version (Authorized Version) of the NT.
While scattered individual Byzantine readings are known to be ancient, the Bzantine text-type as suchthat is, as an identifiable
pattern of distinctive variants and agreementsfirst appears only in the mid-fourth century among a group of fathers associated with
Antioch.. Thus it is the largest and latest of the three major text-types, and, in view of the obvious secondary character of many of its
distinctive readings, also the least valuable for recovering the original text. 1

Key Witnesses: A E F G H K P S V W Byz

1 Michael W. Holmes, Textual Criticism, in New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, eds. D. A. Black & D. S. Dockery (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1991) 107.

Introduction to Exegesis

16

The Major Textual Theories

(1) The Westcott-Hort Theory:
The two most reliable manuscripts (= the two oldest parchment manuscripts):

a = "Codex Sinaiticus"; 4th century; discovered in 1853

B = "Codex Vaticanus"; 4th century; made available in 1890
The readings of these two manuscripts are called "the Neutral text"
Contended that the Byzantine text was inferior
The church fathers up to the time of Chrysostom fail to use the Byzantine text in their quotations from scripture.
Argued for a Lucianic recension in the fourth century which gave rise to the conflate "majority text"
Many now see this theory confirmed by the readings of many of the recently discovered papyri, e.g. 46 (dates from
about A.D. 200)

(2) Reasoned Eclecticism

(or, the modified Westcott-Hort method; also called The Local Geneaological Method)
Metzger; Aland; and most modern textual scholars.
This method gives balanced weight both to the external evidence (manuscript witnesses) and to the internal evidence
of readings (transcriptional and intrinsic probability).
The principal guideline: the variant most likely to be original is the one that best accounts for the existence of the
others.
For many practitioners, more weight is given to the readings in the other manuscript families where they disagree
with Sinaiticus and Vaticanus than Westcott-Hort would have been willing to concede.
This method disallows much use of the Byzantine text-type. For example, note W. Kmmel's remark: "The
Westcott and Hort version of the history of the text has at one point achieved universal acceptance, namely, the
insight into the inferiority of the "Syrian" text type."2 This theory sees the Byzantine text as the product of
recensional activity.

(3) Eclectic Method

(Sometimes Called Rigorous Eclecticism)
Representative proponents: J. K. Elliott (Leeds) and G. D. Kilpatrick (Oxford)
This theory suggests that "it is perfectly feasible to try to reconstruct the original text by applying only internal
criteria." (Elliott)
It views the manuscripts as important primarily as bearers of readings. No one manuscript has the monopoly of
original readings. This theory puts the Byzantine text on equal footing with the other text-types.
This theory regards it as "unlikely that the original text has not survived somewhere in our known manuscripts.
This theory, therefore, represents a break with the Westcott-Hort theory which it whimsically refers to as "the cult
of the best manuscripts."
The eclectic critic claims the advantage of forcing the scholar to consider each variant and not to be content with
the simple solution of trusting the testimony of a couple manuscripts.

(4) Majority Text Theory

Representative Proponents: Zane Hodges (Dallas); Arthur Farstad; Wilbur Pickering
2 W. Kmmel, Introduction to the New Testament, 549.

Introduction to Exegesis

17

Text Produced: Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad, Eds. The Greek New Testament According to the Majority
Text. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982.
This theory asserts that the Scripture has been preserved in the vast majority of the manuscripts. One simply
adopts the reading supported by the symbol Byz.
This theory is based on the assumption that God has providentially preserved his word in the majority of
manuscripts.
This theory is sometimes accompanied with the assumption that heretics have corrupted the text that is represented
in the other manuscripts.
See the critique of this theory below.

(5) Sturz Theory

See Harry A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament Textual Criticism. Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
1984.
THESIS: The Byzantine text-type is an early and independent witness to the text of the NT and should be used for
the weighing of external evidence for various readings to the Greek NT.
His argument is two-fold:
1. Byzantine readings are old
a. Distinctively Byzantine readings are found in early papyri.
b. Byzantine-Western alignments go back into the second century independently and originate in the East-not in the West.
c. The silence of the fathers is explainable and therefore is not a proof of lateness
d. The "conflate" or longer readings are not a proof of lateness.
2. The Byzantine text is unedited in the Westcott-Hort sense.
a. There is no concrete evidence of recensional activity as behind the text.
b. The origin of this text-type is best explained by seeing it stemming from Antioch, a key center of early
Christianity.
Critique:
1. The existence of a Byzantine reading in an early papyrus only proves the antiquity of that particular reading,
not the antiquity of the entire Byzantine text-family.
2. Many of his papyrus-supported Byzantine readings have substantial support from other text-types and thus
are not distinctively Byzantine.

Introduction to Exegesis

18

Criteria Used in Evaluating Variant Readings

(from Metzger, The Text of the New Testament)

I.
1.
2.
3.

External Evidence
The date of the witness
The geographical distribution of witnesses
The genealogical relationship of texts and families of witnesses

II. Internal Evidence

A. TRANSCRIPTIONAL PROBABILITIES
1. The more difficult reading (to the scribe) is to be preferred.
2. The shorter reading is to be preferred
(unless omission of material can be readily explained)
3. The non-harmonized reading is to be preferred.
4. Scribal tendencies to watch for
replacing unfamiliar word with more familiar synonym
Atticizing
smoothing (adding pronouns, conjunctions, and expletives)
B. INTRINSIC PROBABILITIES
1. The style and vocabulary of the author in the book
2. The immediate context
3. Harmony with the usage of the author elsewhere

Unintentional Changes
1. Errors arising from faulty eyesight
Letter of similar appearance (C E Q O); (G P T); (L I N); (D L)
Parablepsis (a looking by the side; oversight); Homoioteleuton (a similar ending of lines; Dittography (double
writing--repetition of a letter or word); Hapolography (writing a word once when it ought to be repeated);
2. Errors arising from faulty hearing
Itacism (h i u & ei oi ui h|)
3. Errors of the mind
substitution of synonyms
variations in the sequence of words
transposition of letters within a word
assimilation of wording from a parallel passage
4. Errors of judgement
incorporation of marginal notations
Intentional Changes
1. Changes involving spelling and grammar
2. Harmonistic corruptions
3. Addition of natural complements and similar adjuncts
e.g. scribes 'and Pharisees'
4. Clearing up historical and geographical difficulties
5. Conflation of readings
6. Alterations made because of docttrinal considerations
7. Addition of miscellaneous details

19

Introduction to Exegesis

Textual Witnesses Chart

(GroupedAccordingtoTextType)
Alexandrian
Reading #1

Reading #2

Reading #3

Reading #4

Reading #5

(Caesarean)

Western

Byzantine

20

Introduction to Exegesis

Textual Witnesses
(GroupedAccordingtoTextType)
Alexandrian
Reading #1

Reading #2

Reading #3

Reading #4

Reading #5

(Caesarean)

Western

Byzantine

21

Introduction to Exegesis

Case Example on Ephesians 1:1

Manuscript Evidence
Translation: "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus."
Alexandrian

(Caesarean)

Western

Byzantine

DG

88 181

Byz

itqr, c, d, dem, e, f, g, r, x,

syrp
goth

Reading #1

evn VEfe,sw|
330 436 451 614 629
630 1241 1877 1881
1962 1984 1985 2127
2492 2495
arm
Ambrosiaster
(Victorinus-Rome)
Chrysostom
Pelagius
Theodoreat
Cyril
Theodoret
Ps-Jerome
Cassiodorus
John-Damascus

ac A B3

33 81 104 326

copsa, bo
IV
362
407
412
428
444
466
V
580
749

Reading #2
omit

vg

46

a
(Marcion)
II
(Tertullian)
220
Origen 254
(Ephraem) mss acc. to Basil
373

P Yvid

424c 1739

Lect