Craig Evans shares word that his Fragments of Truth documentary on the text of the New Testament is now free to watch on YouTube. He’s also uploaded a few extras, including the video below with the late great Larry Hurtado dispensing uncommon wisdom on P52. The documentary has some fantastic footage of early NT papyri and (most of) the interviews are with genuine experts on the subject. It’s worth watching. You can read my review here.
Showing posts with label Craig Evans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Craig Evans. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 03, 2023
Friday, January 15, 2021
A claim that Jesus was a woman(!) and other things I’ve read about recently
Now that I’ve got your attention with my shamelessly clickbaity title, I mention below some observations from my recent reading. But the titular claim is not the only thing I could have used as clickbait! Below are discussions on a manuscript that contains the Comma Johanneum, facsimiles of the Chester Beatty papyri, and even a romance novel inspired by a manuscript!
1. Andrew J. Brown on Codex 61
Part of my job at CSNTM has been purchasing books for our physical library. One group of books that I have been eager to acquire is the four volumes of Andrew J. Brown’s edition of Erasmus’ text in the Amsterdam series, Opera Omnia Desiderii Erasmi Roterodami (ASD VI-1 through ASD VI-4). ASD VI-1 has not been published yet, but I was especially excited to get ASD VI-4 for CSNTM. This volume covers Erasmus’ editions of 1 Timothy–Hebrew, the Catholic Epistles, and Revelation. Brown’s editions are really remarkable. Take ASD VI-4, for example: Opening the 698-page book at random, you’ll see on average about 1/4 of the two-page opening given to Erasmus’ Greek and Latin texts and 3/4 to Brown’s notes. These notes cover textual variations among Erasmus’s editions, textual variants in the manuscripts he would have had access to and even Brown’s own text-critical observations. I even updated my post about textual commentaries to include Brown’s editions there.Saturday, September 01, 2018
Craig Evans on Mark Fragment
Craig Evans was recently interviewed by the Veracity Hill program and in it he tells his side of the story about P.Oxy. 5345 (formerly “First-century Mark”). In terms of new info (at least I think it’s new), he says that his info on it came by way of Dan Wallace [update: he misspoke] and he doesn’t know what all the “hubub” is about. It’s just a case of a papyrologist changing his mind and anyway a 2nd/3rd-century fragment of Mark is still the earliest for Mark and that’s great.
He also responds to “two or three smart alecks” in the blogosphere who have critiqued his view of autograph survival and mentions in passing that he’s working on a book on Jesus and the manuscripts. The discussion of manuscripts starts after the 46 minute mark with the pericope adulterae and the ending of Mark.
He also responds to “two or three smart alecks” in the blogosphere who have critiqued his view of autograph survival and mentions in passing that he’s working on a book on Jesus and the manuscripts. The discussion of manuscripts starts after the 46 minute mark with the pericope adulterae and the ending of Mark.
Saturday, April 14, 2018
Larry Hurtado on P52
I recently came across this short video of Craig Evans interviewing Larry Hurtado. It appears to be made during the production of Evans’ new documentary, Fragments of Truth (see Peter Gurry’s review here). The date of P52 comes up, and Hurtado briefly explains why he thinks it is “among the earliest New Testament manuscripts” but not necessarily the earliest New Testament manuscript.
Hurtado’s position isn’t new or unusual, but I find it helpful to draw attention to another voice among those who reject specifically early or narrow dates for P52. He has gone on the record before about what he thinks of the date of P52 (on his blog here, or in various articles, some of which are in his recent collection of essays, Texts and Artefacts).
Hurtado’s position isn’t new or unusual, but I find it helpful to draw attention to another voice among those who reject specifically early or narrow dates for P52. He has gone on the record before about what he thinks of the date of P52 (on his blog here, or in various articles, some of which are in his recent collection of essays, Texts and Artefacts).
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
Review of ‘Fragments of Truth’

The basic point of the movie is to show that the text of the New Testament is reliable and that the variants that do exist pose no threat to Christian confidence in the New Testament. The closing words go further in saying that when you read your Bible, you “really are reading the Word of God.” Many Christians won’t even notice the leap from “textually reliable” to “inspired by God,” but skeptics probably won’t miss it.
Evans takes us on a tour to locations across Europe that hold some of our most famous Greek New Testament manuscripts in places like Cambridge, Dublin, Vatican City, and Oxford. One nice feature about this is that they interview the curators at most of these stops. I like this because curators often get overlooked. But not here.
Saturday, March 10, 2018
New Film: ‘Fragments of Truth’
Faithlife, producers of Logos Bible Software, have a new film (what don’t these people do??) coming out about New Testament manuscripts. It looks apologetic-y and is hosted by Craig Evans. Below is the description and the promo video. You may see some familiar faces. I don’t know what “groundbreaking new evidence” there will be, but the production quality here seems great. The manuscripts sure do look cool in the trailer.
In this new Faithlife original film, Dr. Craig Evans takes this claim [?] head on, traveling the globe to track down the most ancient New Testament manuscripts. Along the way, he highlights groundbreaking new evidence that is changing the debate. Hear from scholars who have devoted their lives to learning the truth, and discover how the evidence for the reliability of the New Testament manuscripts is stronger than ever. Coming soon exclusively on http://FaithlifeTV.com
Thursday, May 21, 2015
New article: Evans on Books, Autographs and NT Textual Criticism
Craig A. Evans, ‘How Long Were Late Antique Books in Use?
Possible Implications for New Testament Textual Criticism’ Bulletin of Biblical Research 25 (2015), 23-37.
This is a very interesting article which raises some good questions. Essentially, basing himself on the work of Houston on Roman Libraries, Evans thinks that normal papyrus bookrolls in antiquity would have been in use for a long time (an average of 150 years, p. 26). This suggests to Evans that the NT autographs would probably have survived several hundred years (this he takes to be supported by Tertullian’s knowledge of autographs of Paul’s letters kept in the churches to which they were written). The implication for NT textual criticism is that ‘the longevity of these manuscripts [i.e. the autographs] in effect form a bridge linking the first-century autographs and first copies to the great codices, via the early papyrus copies that we possess.’ (p. 35) I’m not convinced by any of the steps in this argument, but it may be helpful to have a conversation about this in the coming days.Abstract: Recent study of libraries and book collections from late antiquity has shown that literary works were read, studied, annotated, corrected, and copied for two or more centuries before being retired or discarded. Given that there is no evidence that early Christian scribal practices differed from pagan practices, we may rightly ask whether early Christian writings, such as the autographs and first copies of the books that eventually would be recognized as canonical Scripture, also remained in use for 100 years or more. The evidence suggests that this was in fact the case. This sort of longevity could mean that at the time our extant Greek NT papyri were written in the late second and early to mid-third centuries, some of the autographs and first copies were still in circulation and in a position to influence the form of the Greek text.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Has anyone seen “First Century Mark”?
I have had correspondence with Craig Evans and have his permission to confirm that he has not seen the alleged first-century manuscript of Mark and does not know the identity of the scholar or scholars to whom it has (presumably) been assigned for publication.
I also believe that Dan Wallace had not seen the alleged manuscript at the time he debated Ehrman. I do not know whether he has seen it since then.
There may have been more eyewitnesses to the Secret Gospel of Mark than to ‘FCM’.
Based on current evidence I would conclude that, although ‘FCM’ may exist, we currently have no reason to believe that it exists or will be published in the coming years. Of course, a historical kernel might exist to the stories of ‘FCM’, but I personally have very limited enthusiasm for source criticism.
I also believe that Dan Wallace had not seen the alleged manuscript at the time he debated Ehrman. I do not know whether he has seen it since then.
There may have been more eyewitnesses to the Secret Gospel of Mark than to ‘FCM’.
Based on current evidence I would conclude that, although ‘FCM’ may exist, we currently have no reason to believe that it exists or will be published in the coming years. Of course, a historical kernel might exist to the stories of ‘FCM’, but I personally have very limited enthusiasm for source criticism.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Craig Evans on Use of Manuscripts
Over at Bible and Interpretation, Craig Evans has a short article on How Long Were Biblical Manuscripts in Use. The blurb reads:
I speculated that if the Gospel of Matthew were published and circulated in 75 CE and if it and some of the first copies of it were in use as long as the manuscripts in the collections and libraries studied by Houston were in use, then some of these manuscripts could still have been in circulation, being read, studied, and copied, as late as the end of the second century and perhaps even on into the third century. This means that New Testament autographs and first copies could still have been available when our oldest extant papyri manuscripts (e.g., P45, P46, P66) were produced. If still in circulation and being read and copied, the autographs and first copies would have continued to give shape to the text. In a sense, then, the gap between autograph and extant manuscript is bridged.In the end Evans wonders what bearing this has for conceiving of early Christian libraries and the formation of the canon:
What I propose is that the New Testament canon of writings be viewed more as a library or collection. Many of the libraries and collections that Houston studied were assembled either by families or by groups of literate friends with common reading interests. Members of these groups met together from time to time to read and study. They acquired manuscripts, sometimes multiple copies, compared and discussed texts, and made notes, which in some instances approximate what we today would regard as commentary. I should think that some of these activities were very much those of early Christian groups that collected the founding documents of the Christian faith. In short, some of the dynamics behind the collecting, reading, and studying of the literary collections studied by Houston might be very close to the dynamics behind the collecting, reading, and studying of sacred texts by early Christian groups.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Craig Evans Debates Bart Ehrman


The debate evolved around seven questions:
1: Are the gospels historically reliable?
2: Do the gospels accurately preserve the teachings of Jesus Christ?
3: Do the gospels accurately preserve the activities of Jesus Christ?
4: Do the gospels contain eyewitness tradition?
5: Do archaeologists and historians use the gospels as sources?
6: Have the gospels been accurately preserved done through the centuries
7: Do scribal errors and textual variants significantly impact any teaching of Jesus or any important Christian teaching?
See a video of the debate here.
Or, listen to an audio recording here.
If you don't have time, you can read a (tendentious and humorous) summary of the arguments here.
Finally, a reflection: a local church hosting a debate between two New testament scholars would be something very unusual in Sweden. Local churches here seem to pay little attention to what the academy does (they should since it will affect them).
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
Loading...