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due for an up-to-date introduction to NT textual criticism since the standard classic in our field (Metzger-Ehrman) is out of date in some key areas (e.g., re: text-types and computer tools like the CBGM) and since others like Jongkind's and Anderson's are brief by design.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 20th century. Yet, these leave readers unaware of some
of the sweeping changes that occurred in the field in the late 20th
and early 21st 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.”
