study.9
When it comes to textual criticism, New Testament scholarship is miles ahead of Qur’anic scholarship.10 Christian scholars who have plunged into the world of manuscripts have openly acknowledged the presence of variants and, in places, uncertainties. The result has been the restoration of the text that closely approximates the original. The work is ongoing and optimistic.
Qur’anic scholars face a much greater challenge, for the formation of the Qur’an was nothing like that of the individual books of the New Testament. The New Testament books were written as discrete literary units by one author and then distributed and copied. The Qur’an did not come about this way. Muhammad did not write it. He may have dictated portions of it. Some of his followers may have written portions of it during Muhammad’s lifetime. Others had memorized it. But exactly how the Qur’an as a whole came together in the aftermath of Muhammad’s death is not clear. The manuscript evidence suggests “it cannot be demonstrated that there was one version going back to Muhammad” and that “there never was one original text of the Qur’an.”11 Notwithstanding the nature of the evidence, the belief in such a text is “a mainstay of popular Islamic discourse.”12 It is akin to Christian fundamentalists who think the Textus Receptus, which underlies the King James Version, goes back to the apostles.
How Does the New Testament Manuscript Record Compare to that of the Classics?
One way of measuring the historical worth of the New Testament Gospels is to compare them to other writings from antiquity, writings on which modern historians rely. Allow us to mention a number of these writings, beginning with the oldest. Most of our examples are historical works, which makes for a more appropriate comparison with the New Testament Gospels, though we will look at a few examples of the writings of philosophers and poets.
The Greek historian Herodotus, who lived c. 488–428 BC, wrote a work called The Histories. The oldest major manuscript dates to AD 800, some 1,200 years later than the original. Thucydides of Athens, who lived c. 460–400 BC, wrote a work called History of the War, that is, the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta (431–404 BC). Our oldest major manuscript dates to AD 900. Greek statesman and historian Xenophon, who lived c. 430–354 BC, wrote the Anabasis, the famous account of the march of the 10,000 Greek warriors. This classic was written in 394 BC and published c. 370 BC. We have six manuscripts of the work, the oldest dating to AD 1320, the others dating to the fifteenth century AD.
Most of our oldest manuscripts of the works of the great philosopher Plato, who lived c. 429–347 BC, date to AD 950. Our best manuscript of Histories by Polybius, who lived c. 200–118 BC, dates to the eleventh century AD. Lucretius, the Epicurean poet who lived c. 94–55 BC, wrote a work called On the Nature of Things. We have two manuscripts. The oldest dates to the eleventh century AD.
Julius Caesar (100–44 BC) wrote his Gallic War during the years 58–50 BC. We possess some ten fairly well preserved manuscripts, of which the oldest date to about AD 850. Titus Livius, or simply Livy, lived from 59 BC to AD 17. He authored Roman History. Of the original 142 books, only Books 1–10 and 21–45 survive. Our oldest manuscript, containing parts of Books 3–6, dates to about AD 350. Our largest manuscript, containing most of what is extant, dates to the fifth century.
Cornelius Tacitus, born, we believe, in AD 56, wrote Histories sometime around AD 110 and Annals sometime around AD 115. The latter may never have been completed. Portions of both are lost. Our oldest manuscripts date to the ninth and eleventh centuries AD. His minor works Agricola and Germania are preserved in a tenth-century codex.
The writings of Josephus (c. AD 37–100) are of great importance for New Testament studies. All seven books of his Jewish War (c. AD 75) survive in nine complete manuscripts, of which the oldest dates to the fifth century. His twenty-volume Jewish Antiquities (c. 93) is extant in six Greek manuscripts, the three most reliable of which date to the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. Despite this distance between the original work and the extant copies, no scholar seriously questions the integrity of the text.
Arrian, who lived c. AD 86–160, wrote the Anabasis of Alexander, some 450 years after the brief reign of the famous conqueror. Our earliest extant copy of Arrian’s work, which is damaged and in places illegible, dates to AD 1200.
Against the backdrop of these classical works the New Testament Gospels compare quite favorably. Large portions of the four Gospels are preserved in β45, a papyrus codex that dates to the early third century or perhaps the late second century, as some contend. Late second-century β66 preserves most of the Gospel of John. Late second-century β75 preserves large chunks of Luke and John. A number of small fragments are candidates for a second-century date. These include β64,67, β77, β103 and β104, which preserve fragments of Matthew; β4, which may have been part of β64,67, preserves a fragment of Luke; and β5, β52, β90, β108 and β109 preserve small fragments of the Gospel of John. The prize for being the oldest fragment of a New Testament writing goes to β52, which contains small portions of John 18 and is dated by most papyrologists to shortly before AD 150, or about 50 or 60 years after John was composed and first circulated.
There are a number of other papyri fragments dating to the third century. In all, some 60 manuscripts date before AD 300. Recall, too, that large portions of the Gospels are quoted in second- and third-century Church Fathers. And, of course, we have the great codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, which contain the four Gospels. These codices are dated to about AD 340. This means that we have the complete text of the four New Testament Gospels preserved in documents about 270–280 years removed from the autographs, that we have substantial portions of the text of the Gospels preserved in documents about 130–200 years removed from the autographs, and that we have tiny portions of the text in perhaps as many as one dozen documents about 70–120 years removed from the autographs. All in all, not a bad record. Compared to many of the classical writings and histories, where in most cases there are gaps of 800 to 1,000 years or more between the time of the author and our oldest surviving copy of his manuscript, it is an excellent record indeed.
With regard to the New Testament Gospels, the temporal distance between an event of history or a historical personage and its record is also impressive. The Synoptic Gospels were written about 30–40 years or so after the death of Jesus. Q, the source Matthew and Luke utilized, may have been written in part within a decade of Jesus’ death. The fourth Gospel was written 60–70 years after the death of Jesus. In the case of some of the classical writers, the temporal distance is comparable. Indeed, some classical writers were eyewitnesses of at least some of the events they described; others claimed acquaintance with eyewitnesses. But this is not always the case. Livy and Tacitus wrote greatly removed in time from most of the events they describe in their respective accounts of Roman history.13 Even with respect to the famous conqueror Alexander the Great, there is a surprising distance between the man and the sources that tell us about him.14
This list could be extended, but we think enough examples have been provided to make our point. Most of our literature from late antiquity that has survived is extant in small numbers of manuscripts, which in most cases are greatly removed in time from their authors. Some of the authors of these works were greatly removed in time from the events they narrate. Despite these disadvantages, historians of ancient Greece and Rome believe their sources are sufficient for the task.15
As historical sources the New Testament Gospels are very promising. Three of the four Gospels were written before the end of the generation that knew Jesus or heard stories and teachings from those who knew Jesus. This fact leaves open the possibility that their accounts can give
