Quarles: Introducing New Testament Textual Criticism for the 21st Century

It seems to me that we are due for an up-to-date introduction to NT textual criticism since the standard classic in our field (Metzger-Ehrman) is out of date in some key areas (e.g., re: text-types and computer tools like the CBGM) and since others like Jongkind's and Anderson's are brief by design. That's why I was pleased to see Chuck Quarles's new introduction that came out in March of this year. I asked Chuck if he would mind telling our readers a bit about what motivated him to write it and what distinguishes it. —Peter

---

Several respected introductions to New Testament textual criticism have guided New Testament students in the exercise of restoring the New Testament text for generations. These volumes are generally considered to be “tried and true,” and professors and students may be reluctant to replace them or even supplement them with the latest book on the topic. I sympathize with that sentiment. These trusted volumes have shaped my own approach to the discipline in important ways and I am grateful for them.

However, as I taught master’s courses and PhD seminars in New Testament textual criticism over the last decade, I became increasingly convinced that a new introduction was badly needed. The standard introductions masterfully explain the methods and approaches to textual criticism applied in most of the 20^th century. Yet, these leave readers unaware of some of the sweeping changes that occurred in the field in the late 20^th and early 21^st century.

For example, the standard introductions still affirm the old text-type approach, even though the leading specialists in the field have offered persuasive evidence that the approach is flawed. Among other problems, old theories about the relationships between texts were sometimes based on a relatively small sample of variant units or shared tendencies. However, developments in computer technology enable researchers to track the level of agreement between two texts on every shared variant unit resulting in much more accurate information about the relationships between texts. The data demonstrates that leading representatives of the so-called Western text have greater similarity to representatives of other textual groups than with witnesses supposedly belonging to the same text type! (see Appendix III of the book)

Computer applications made other advances possible too. Westcott and Hort famously argued that “ALL TRUSTWORTHY RESTORATION OF CORRUPTED TEXTS IS FOUNDED ON THE STUDY OF THEIR HISTORY, that is, of the relations of descent or affinity which connect the several documents.” They called for the development of a “genealogical tree of transmission” and stated that the more exactly text critics are “able to trace the chief ramifications of the tree, and to determine the places of the several documents among the branches, the more secure will be the foundations laid for a criticism capable of distinguishing the original text from its successive corruptions.”

Unfortunately, Westcott and Hort lacked the tools (and manpower) to determine even the affinity, much less the descent, of the texts available to them. Until the advent of the computer age, keeping track of such massive amounts of data was simply not humanly possible. However, using digitized transcriptions of ancient manuscripts and advanced data management techniques, researchers can measure affinity, compare the amount of prior or derivative readings in texts, and draw firm conclusions about the genealogical relationships between texts. The old vision of Westcott and Hort is finally achievable!

Unfortunately, New Testament textual criticism is still taught in many university and seminary classes as if these remarkable advances have not occurred. New Testament Textual Criticism for the 21^st Century is intended to bring New Testament students and professors who are not specialists in the field of textual criticism (at least, not yet) up-to-date so they can take advantage of new helpful tools in their text critical research. The introduction highlights resources such as the Editio Critica Maior, the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, the International Greek New Testament Project, the Center for New Testament Textual Studies, the digital resources of major libraries, and sites devoted to specific text-critical issues like the MARK16 virtual research environment.

The book especially features the impressive tools developed by the Institute for New Testament Textual Research such as the Kurzgefasste Liste Online, the NT Virtual Manuscript Room, the Amsterdam Database of Conjectural Emendations, and the online ECM texts with their corresponding databases. It also illustrates how these tools assist in making textual decisions. For example, rather than relying on the old Aland categories (I and II) to identify texts that are generally accurate and reliable (which was not the original purpose of those categories), the book demonstrates how researchers can now compare witnesses to the “initial text,” the restored text printed as the base text in the ECM volumes and new editions of the UBS and NA Greek texts. This is far better than assuming that a text is reliable and accurate simply because the author of a textbook claimed so.

When seeking to find if texts from the same era that are not closely related to each other share a specific reading (which may indicate the reading existed several generations of copies earlier), researchers can find the precise level of agreement between these witnesses using tools produced for the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (CBGM). This assessment of relationships is far more accurate than simply relying on old theories about text types. The clear step-by-step instructions for using the tools developed by the CBGM do not appear in other introductions.

New Testament Textual Criticism for the 21^st Century also compares and contrasts the three major approaches to textual criticism. The book carefully explains the guiding principles of reasoned eclecticism. My original goal was to keep the book very simple and very brief. However, my experience in teaching NTTC ultimately prompted me to write a longer book with more thorough explanations of the criteria for identifying the original readings. I recognize that students like very short, succinct criteria such as “the shorter reading is to be preferred,” “the more difficult reading is to be preferred,” or “the reading with the widest geographical distribution is to be preferred.” However, I discovered that students apply the criteria inappropriately if they do not understand the reasoning behind these criteria or the caveats and qualifications given by the scholars who first proposed them. They prefer shorter readings even in obvious cases of haplography caused by a leap “from same to same.” They prefer nonsense readings or readings that are practically impossible in context because these are the most difficult. They fail to note that readings supported by the greater number of witnesses usually also have the widest geographical distribution and they prefer those readings even when the witnesses are relatively late.

The book also takes a different approach to the evaluation of scribal tendencies than many other introductions do. It describes the three approaches used to discern the tendencies of scribes and urges readers to examine tendencies in each witness rather than working from global assumptions about an imagined stereotypical copyist. These assumptions are often flawed since they do not account for the differences in individual scribes with different levels of training and skill who are from different eras and copying centers.

In this book, I avoid simplistic and potentially misleading explanations of criteria. Obviously, I was not attempting to complicate matters (or to sound erudite). However, I did not want to sacrifice accuracy and clarity for the sake of simplicity. Experience in the classroom has taught me that students need to understand the reasoning behind each criterion in order to apply the criteria responsibly. Thus, I give brief accounts of the history of the criteria, the rationales for them, and illustrate how the criteria apply to specific textual questions.

One of the most important parts of the book guides students in the practice of textual criticism by applying the entire method to three specific variant units. These exercises are detailed and the discussions are much more thorough than the brief discussions that one often finds in the standard introductions, New Testament commentaries, or even the standard textual commentaries. Again, the goal is certainly not to complicate the discipline. I do intend to demonstrate that a responsible practice of textual criticism takes considerable time and effort and some degree of expertise. The often very brief discussions of variant readings in many sources sometimes give students the impression that they can make snap judgments about significant text-critical issues. I refer to this in my classes as “drive-by textual criticism.” Some assume that thorough research is not necessary. A glance at the apparatus and a few moments’ thought about applicable criteria will automatically lead them to the correct decision. But we will not advance scholarship with this sloppy approach.

Too few scholars are currently devoted to textual criticism, though the numbers seem to be growing. Many important variant units have never been thoroughly researched. I wanted the models that I presented to be sufficiently detailed to guide students in writing a full essay or academic journal article on a specific variant unit in order to fill this enormous gap. Two of the three models that I presented were drawn from journal articles that I previously published, and interested students may refer to those articles for even more detailed examples. My hope is that a new cadre of textual critics will advance our understanding of the text through extensive research on one variant unit after another. May this book inspire many students to join us soon in what Tischendorf called his “sacred quest,” a great collaborative effort to restore the original text of the New Testament.