Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism, edited by Elijah Hixson and Peter Gurry. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2019. 400 pp. $40.00.
There may be no field within biblical studies more complex than textual criticism. It divides into two almost completely distinct disciplines, one per testament. Properly practiced, even just the New Testament variety of textual criticism requires deep knowledge of the incredible intricacies of scribal habits, of materials science (papyrus, ink recipes, palimpsests), of church history, of Koine Greek phonology, of historical concepts of canon, of multiple Greek scripts (including the accursed medieval cursive), even of the history of printed editions of the Greek New Testament. Textual criticism is a demanding discipline.
It is also an important one for Christian apologetics: what use is an inspired Bible that is widely perceived to be textually unstable? So Christian apologists have frequently appealed to the science of New Testament textual criticism to bolster their defense of the faith. They love to mention the number of Greek New Testament manuscripts extant; that number compared to the number of manuscripts we have from other famous ancient documents (Homer, Seneca, etc.); the stability of the canon over time; the amount of the New Testament that could be reconstructed based solely on quotations from the fathers; the number of variants in the manuscript tradition; and other assorted points drawn from the field of textual criticism.
Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this review combine to present a real problem: placing incredibly complex matters in the hands of people whose—wholly salutary—agenda is to promote and defend the Christian faith is bound to produce tendentious inaccuracies.
Enter Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism (IVP Academic, 2019). The occasion for this book may be the habit of evangelists to speak evangelistically, but the audience for it is anyone and everyone interested in the state of the New Testament textual-critical art. Peter Gurry and Elijah Hixson have assembled an excellent set of writers who understand the complexities of the field. They have written this book in a way that is both careful and accessible—as accessible as such a book can be given its frequently intricate subject matter. This book absolutely can and should be read by pastors; it is an entertaining and engrossing education in a field that does matter for ministry. People both inside and outside the church do have questions about the textual history of the New Testament, and the subject will necessarily come up in the work of every expository preacher who makes it to the end of John 7 (or the beginning of Rom 5, or the end of Mark, etc.).
The point of Myths and Mistakes is not to remove points about textual criticism from the arsenals of pastors and apologists, but to calibrate the caliber of their bullets. For example, Jacob W. Peterson questions statements from various apologists about the number of extant manuscripts of the New Testament. He shows that a great deal depends on how you count. But in the end he provides this takeaway: “Most manuscripts of the New Testament are only manuscripts of part of the New Testament, and providing an exact count of them is a fool’s errand. It is best to say that there are about fifty-three hundred Greek New Testament manuscripts in existence, although fifty-one hundred might be the safer estimate” (69).
This is clear, practical, and careful—as is the entire book. The work has three parts.
The first focuses on manuscripts. In this portion of the book, for example, James B. Prothro corrects the figures used by various apologists who make the common argument that we have far more New Testament Greek manuscripts than we do manuscripts of other Ancient Greek authors. Elijah Hixson shows how manuscripts are dated.
The second part discusses the work of copyists. Here, to choose only one chapter, Peter Gurry picks up a question he has worked on for some time: how many variants are there in the Greek New Testament manuscript tradition—and crucially, how exactly does one count?
The third part focuses on translation, patristic citation, and canon. Here (again to choose just one chapter) Andrew Blaski provides a fascinating look at what can and cannot be gained from examining patristic citations of the New Testament.
Like theologians who work on the Trinity, true textual critics have a “yes, but” for almost any statement made by the uninitiated. Greg Lanier shows carefully, for example, why, “sometimes later manuscripts are better manuscripts” (111–12). He spoke of “appreciating the later channels of an ancient stream” (118); that is, of the value of the Byzantine family of manuscripts.
This reviewer felt that Timothy Mitchell’s otherwise excellent and careful essay promised a bit more than it delivered when it came to its central question: Is Craig Evans right to propose that the NT autographs may have remained in use for centuries? The title seemed to promise a takedown of Evan’s view; it delivered rather a few caveats and potential counterexamples.
Other very specific and minute claims in this book will no doubt be corrected or amended in time, but overall the book commended itself as eminently careful.
There is no other book quite like this one: a readable and accessible multi-author work acquainting Bible students with some of the latest and most useful information about New Testament textual criticism. One of the most outstanding features of the book, an apparently simple addition that nonetheless required significant effort and provides incredible value, is the bullet-point list of “Key Takeaways” at the end of each chapter. These can and should be consulted for many years.
Myths and Mistakes is not afraid to say “yes, but” (or even Nein!) to big names who have committed public errors regarding New Testament textual criticism. One name that comes up several times, doyen of the field Daniel B. Wallace, provides a humble and entertaining foreword to the book. His is the attitude all evangelical readers of the book should have: a willingness to make sure our talking points in support of the Truth are actually true.
