Restoration Quarterly Volume 5 | Number 4 Article 2 10-1-1961 The onC tributions of Textual Criticism to the Interpretation of the New Testament Frank Pack Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/restorationquarterly Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, Christianity Commons, Comparative Methodologies and Theories Commons, History of Christianity Commons, Liturgy and Worship Commons, Missions and World Christianity Commons, Practical Theology Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Pack, Frank (1961) "The onC tributions of Textual Criticism to the Interpretation of the New Testament," Restoration Quarterly: Vol. 5 : No. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/restorationquarterly/vol5/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ ACU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Restoration Quarterly by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ ACU. RESTORATION QUARTERLY CONTENTS An Introduction : Th e Task and Method of Ex egesis -Abraham J . Malh erbe ...................................................... .......... 169 Th e Contributions of Textu al Criticism t o th e Inte rpret ation of th e New Testa ment-F ran k Pack ......................................... 179 Th e Lan guage Backgro und of the New Testam ent-J . W. Rober ts 193 Th e Psych ological App roac h to Int er pret ation-Paul Sou thern .... 205 Th e J ewish Background of the New Testament-J ack P. La wis .. 209 Th e Pagan Back gro und of th e New Testam ent - Roy Bowen Wa r d ........................................................................ 216 Patri stic Int er pretat ion of th e Bible-William M. Gree n ................ 230 Th e New Testament in th e Roman Int er pr etation -F austo Sal voni .............................. .............................................. 236 Alexa nd er Campb ell on Int erp re ting th e Bible-A Repr int ........ 248 Th e Pr oblem of Biblical Hermeneutics-Don H. McGau ghey ........ 251 Announcement .. ...... .... ............................................. ................................. 257 Perso na lia .................................................................................................. 258 Ind ex to Volum e V--C allie Fa ye Millik en ........................................ 259 I STUDIES IN CHRISTIAN SCHOLARSHIP VOL. 5 NO . 4 FOURTH QU A RT E R, 1961 The Contributions of Textual Criticism to the Interpretation of the New Testament Frank Pack Chri stianity, like Judaism, is the religion of the Book. Its claims are presented upon the pages of the Holy Scriptures. It recognizes that the Old Testament which was the Bible of the Jews is incomplete and finds its true fulfillment in J esus Christ, who fulfills the law and the prophets (Ma tt. 5:17 ). The New Testame nt sets forth the revelation of God in J esus of Naza reth, who is "the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Matt. 16 :16). "It is God's way of speaking to us now." 1 God willed that His Church should enjoy the benefit of His written will, at once as a ru le of doctrine and as a guide unto holy living. For this cause He so enlight ened the minds of the Apostles and Evangelists by His Spirit, that they recorded what He had imprinted on their hearts or brought to their remem ­ bra nce, without the risk of error in anything essential to the verity of the gospel. 2 A modern scholar of the liberal tradition has also stated the funda­ mental importanc e of the Bible in the following way. The Bible is for us the word of God, our chief guide for the salvation of humanity. We need not attempt he re to exp lain theologically how or why this may be so. The Bibl e is the his­ toric basis for the Christian religion, and we who are Christians perceive in it, above all other writings, man's only hope of lif e. It is with th is book that the textual critic deals. This is the book whos e true text he seeks and whose transmission from gen­ eration to gene1·ation he studies to und erstan d. 3 No interpretation can take place without first settling the ques­ tion of what is the text of the passage to be interpreted. That this has already been done in large measure through the careful study of textual scholars in past centuries should be cause for rejoicing by Bible students. Yet there are still passages where the light of recent discove ries and increased study can add to our und erst anding . of the Scriptur es. One must und erstand the meaning of God's word if he would obey his will, and anything that aids in that und erstanding makes a great contribut ion to th e Christian's life. Professor W. A. 1 Wentz, Abdel Ross, "The New Testament and the Word of ·God," An In troduction to the R evised S tandard Ver sion of the N ew· Testa­ ment (New York: Int ernational Council of Religious Education, 1946), p. 64. 2 Scrivener, F. H. A., A Plain Inflroduction to the Criticism of the New Testam ent, fo urth edition, edited by Edward Miller (L ondon : George Bell and Sons, 1894), Vol. I, pp. 1, 2. , 8Cla rk, Kenneth W., " Th e Manuscripts of tl1e Greek New · Testa 0 ment," Merrill M. Parvis and Allen P. Wikgren, editors, New Testa ­ ment Manuscript Studi es (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950), p. 1. 179 Irwin in his pr esidential adress to the Society of Biblica l Lit e1·atu re and E xege sis in 1959 point ed out the fact that . .. th e f irst r espon sibili ty of th e exegete . .. is t o deter­ mine as exactly as possible j ust wha t the Biblical wr iter ac­ t ually mean t . th e Bibl e its elf is our fi rst and altoge th er best sou rce for the st udy of th e Bibl e ; not th e necessities of moder n th eology, not t he dictum of t radit ion, nor any clever idea which th e curr ent vog ue may devise, but the Bibl e its elf with what ever we can ma ke of it by all th e best kn own proce­ dure s is al one to te ll us what th e Bibl e is an d what it means .4 Th e peculiar nat ure of th e Bible thus leads us to desire as nearly as possible to secure its exact words, for we must kn ow precise ly whai t he writ t en t ext is.5 The Qua n tity of th e Wi tne ss t o t h e New Testm n en t Text Wh en we spe ak of the New Testament today we thi nk of a pr inted book, yet we must be aw are of t he fa ct th at prin t ing is a moder n inven ti on and th at none of t he earli est copies of the New Testame nt books wer e print ed. Th e origi na ls of ever y one of the books of th e New Testam ent hav e long sin ce disappeared . Th ese aut ograp hs were no doubt wr itt en upon pa pyr us which, like paper , was a peris hable mater ial. Only und er t he most favor abl e circumstan ces in a dry cli­ mat e such as E gypt af for ds could t hey be expected to su rvive for many yea r s. As th e ear ly chu rch made use of th ese books in publi c reading and study th ey would soon wear out and need to be copied. Later copies had to be made of these copies and our oldest survi vin g New Testam ent manuscripts ar e no doubt copies of copies of th e auto­ gr aphs. The fact that no autographs of the New Testament books ha ve sur­ vived should not greatly disturb us, however, for no one of t he an­ cient classics so revered in later times survived in autograph form . All of the Greek and Latin classical writers with the exception of Vergil survived in manuscripts that are later than the 9th century A.D. which seperates them several hundred years from the time of the autographs. Most of these are few in number and late in date for each author. 6 By contrast we can say that "for no literary work that has come down to us from the ancient world is there such an 4lrwin, W. A., "A Still Small Voice ... Said, What Are You Doing Here?" Journal of Biblical Literature. 78 (1959), p. 3. 5 Dana, H. E ., Sea rching the Scriptures (Kansas City : Central Seminary Press, 1946), p. 137. 6 F. C. Grant calls attention to the fact that there are only two manuscripts of the Latin poet Lucretius, one a ninth century and the other a tenth century manuscript, besides some late copies of a lost uncial archetype. These manuscripts are faulty having large gaps in their maet rial that must be supplied by the learned conjec­ tures of scholars in order to make the poetic works complete. The New Testament is in no such unfavorable position. F. C. Grant, Translating the Bibl e (Greenwich, Conn.: Seabury Press, 1961), p. 123. 180 abundance of manuscript evidence as for the New Testament." 7 The earliest New Testament document in our possession comes from within a half century of the writing of the autograph. This is a fragment of the gospel of John 18:31-33, 37, 38 which is dated in the first half of the 2nd century.