![]() ![]() The above examples highlight internal evidence because they have to do with that particular copy. When conducting textual criticism, you would consider the internal evidence and external evidence. This could show up in a copy that reads, “the fox jumped over the dog.” It’s still true and still captures the message, but it’s missing a few words. Even diligent scribes would make the occasional mistake. ![]() Perhaps the scribe was hungry or tired or lost their place while copying the original text. In this case, we can see that textual critics give more weight to the harder or clunkier reading, because it’s likely that a change in the text would make it easier to read.įinally, a copy would sometimes have an honest mistake. ![]() But the original line calls the fox “brown.” So it’s easy to see why this copy changes the text, because most changes are going to add clarity and make more sense. Meanwhile, another scribe wrote, “The red fox jumped over the lazy dog.” This makes sense, because foxes are usually red, not brown. Thankfully, the other copies retain the original line, so we would be able to know this scribe made some changes. Sometimes, scribes would make a change to the text to “improve” it or add their clarifying interpretations. But he changed the original text in the process. Now, imagine a scribe who’s making a new copy and writes, “The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.” He feels better about himself because he knows this is intended as a sentence that uses every letter of the English alphabet, so the scribe completes the incomplete line. A Helpful ExampleĬonsider the following example that can help us understand how textual criticism works. The video at the bottom of this post is also a helpful discussion starter. Since this is a rather technical field of study, the following is a simplified way I have taught about it to teenagers. But it does mean they reject Scripture and Christianity for other reasons than the reliability of the Bible. This doesn’t mean every textual critic believes in the inspiration and authority of Scripture. Contrary to the popular objection, the Bible is a remarkably trustworthy ancient document. Textual Criticism is an approach that helps scholars identify the original text of an ancient document, using both external and internal evidence. A surprising source of help comes from a field of study called Textual Criticism. But students can read the Bible with confidence. It’s totally unreliable.” If the middle of this objection was true, then their conclusion would be too. It was made up by people way after the time of Jesus. It’s not uncommon to hear people say, “You can’t trust the Bible. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |