Why the “Telephone Game” Doesn’t Apply to Copying the Bible

Home / KQ2 / Why the “Telephone Game” Doesn’t Apply to Copying the Bible
Part 21 –
Why the “Telephone Game” Doesn’t Apply to Copying the Bible
This episode addresses a common misperception about the trustworthiness of the Bible based on successive generations of copying. If there are 15 generations of copies, and each generation through scribal error introduces some corruption into the text, then, the argument goes, the last generation of copies will express the ACCUMULATED errors of all previous copies. This reasoning is the “telephone game” applied to copying. Such reasoning is invalid because, in the case of the New Testament, the second and third generation of copies can always be consulted. The John Rylands fragment, c.a. 125, is probably a copy of a copy of the original autograph penned by the apostle John. Since we now have a trove of early manuscripts to consult in translation, we’re not dependent on successive generations of copies that may have allowed errors to creep into the text. Additionally, if doubt persists over the reliability of early manuscripts, then we simply need to compare them. The huge number of New Testament manuscripts (5,800) enables comparative analysis in which we can, in most cases, be very sure of the original autograph.
  • 00:00:12 – Introduction to Kingdom Questions
  • 00:00:35 – Conspiracy Monday: The Deity of Christ
  • 00:01:52 – Analyzing Early Manuscripts
  • 00:03:47 – Discovery of the John Rylands Fragment
  • 00:05:38 – Evidence Against the Conspiracy Theory
  • 00:06:55 – P66 and the Deity of Christ
  • 00:08:44 – Gospel of Thomas and Gnostic Claims
  • 00:10:45 – Contrasting Orthodox Christianity and Gnosticism
  • 00:12:14 – The Nature of Conspiracy Theories
  • 00:12:50 – Closing Prayer
Part 21 –
Why the “Telephone Game” Doesn’t Apply to Copying the Bible
  • 00:00:12 – Introduction to Kingdom Questions
  • 00:00:35 – Conspiracy Monday: The Deity of Christ
  • 00:01:52 – Analyzing Early Manuscripts
  • 00:03:47 – Discovery of the John Rylands Fragment
  • 00:05:38 – Evidence Against the Conspiracy Theory
  • 00:06:55 – P66 and the Deity of Christ
  • 00:08:44 – Gospel of Thomas and Gnostic Claims
  • 00:10:45 – Contrasting Orthodox Christianity and Gnosticism
  • 00:12:14 – The Nature of Conspiracy Theories
  • 00:12:50 – Closing Prayer
This episode addresses a common misperception about the trustworthiness of the Bible based on successive generations of copying. If there are 15 generations of copies, and each generation through scribal error introduces some corruption into the text, then, the argument goes, the last generation of copies will express the ACCUMULATED errors of all previous copies. This reasoning is the “telephone game” applied to copying. Such reasoning is invalid because, in the case of the New Testament, the second and third generation of copies can always be consulted. The John Rylands fragment, c.a. 125, is probably a copy of a copy of the original autograph penned by the apostle John. Since we now have a trove of early manuscripts to consult in translation, we’re not dependent on successive generations of copies that may have allowed errors to creep into the text. Additionally, if doubt persists over the reliability of early manuscripts, then we simply need to compare them. The huge number of New Testament manuscripts (5,800) enables comparative analysis in which we can, in most cases, be very sure of the original autograph.

Episode Scripture References -

1 John 4:2, John 1:1, John 1:14, John 8:58-59

More About This Episode -

In the podcast episode titled “Why the ‘Telephone Game’ Doesn’t Apply to Copying the Bible,” hosted by Victor Vigorito and introduced by Voiceover, Victor addresses a question related to the accuracy of biblical text, specifically challenging the idea that the deity of Christ was an invention developed later in church history, such as in the time of Constantine.


Victor begins by framing the discussion around a common conspiracy theory that suggests the deity of Christ was added into Christian doctrine much later. He explains that a scientific method to assess this claim is to compare early manuscripts of the New Testament with later copies, emphasizing the large number of existing manuscripts, over 5,800.


He highlights the importance of the book of John in this context, noting that the earliest existing manuscript, the John Rylands fragment, dates from around 125 to 150 AD. Victor contrasts this with the previous assumption by scholar C.F. Bauer, who suggested John was written much later (around 160 to 170 AD). If John were dated too late, it would weaken the argument of it being an eyewitness account.


Victor tells the story of how C.H. Roberts discovered the John Rylands fragment in 1934, which proved that John was written earlier than Bauer’s assumptions indicated. This fragment consists of both sides of a manuscript page, suggesting it was part of a codex, which further pushes the dating back of the original autograph.


Victor concludes that the discovery of the John Rylands fragment undermines a century of previous scholarship disputing the eyewitness authorship of John. He states that with evidence such as the earlier manuscripts, one can retain confidence in the accuracy of the biblical text, specifically regarding the claims about the deity of Christ in the book of John.

Key Terms From This Episode -

Main Theme: Determining the correct Bible translation from many available options

    Key Points:

  • Challenge Against: Conspiracy theory suggesting the deity of Christ was added later in church history (e.g., during Constantine’s time)
  • Method of Discussion: Comparison of early New Testament manuscripts with later copies (over 5,800 existing)
  • Key Focus: The book of John and the significance of the John Rylands fragment (125-150 AD)
  • Counterargument to Scholar C.F. Bauer: Bauer dated John’s writing to 160-170 AD; earlier dating supports eyewitness authorship
  • Historical Note: C.H. Roberts discovered the John Rylands fragment in 1934, which supports earlier dating
  • Episode Scripture References -

    1 John 4:2, John 1:1, John 1:14, John 8:58-59

    More About This Episode -

    In the podcast episode titled “Why the ‘Telephone Game’ Doesn’t Apply to Copying the Bible,” hosted by Victor Vigorito and introduced by Voiceover, Victor addresses a question related to the accuracy of biblical text, specifically challenging the idea that the deity of Christ was an invention developed later in church history, such as in the time of Constantine.


    Victor begins by framing the discussion around a common conspiracy theory that suggests the deity of Christ was added into Christian doctrine much later. He explains that a scientific method to assess this claim is to compare early manuscripts of the New Testament with later copies, emphasizing the large number of existing manuscripts, over 5,800.


    He highlights the importance of the book of John in this context, noting that the earliest existing manuscript, the John Rylands fragment, dates from around 125 to 150 AD. Victor contrasts this with the previous assumption by scholar C.F. Bauer, who suggested John was written much later (around 160 to 170 AD). If John were dated too late, it would weaken the argument of it being an eyewitness account.


    Victor tells the story of how C.H. Roberts discovered the John Rylands fragment in 1934, which proved that John was written earlier than Bauer’s assumptions indicated. This fragment consists of both sides of a manuscript page, suggesting it was part of a codex, which further pushes the dating back of the original autograph.


    Victor concludes that the discovery of the John Rylands fragment undermines a century of previous scholarship disputing the eyewitness authorship of John. He states that with evidence such as the earlier manuscripts, one can retain confidence in the accuracy of the biblical text, specifically regarding the claims about the deity of Christ in the book of John.

    Key Terms From This Episode -

    Main Theme: Determining the correct Bible translation from many available options

      Key Points:

  • Challenge Against: Conspiracy theory suggesting the deity of Christ was added later in church history (e.g., during Constantine’s time)
  • Method of Discussion: Comparison of early New Testament manuscripts with later copies (over 5,800 existing)
  • Key Focus: The book of John and the significance of the John Rylands fragment (125-150 AD)
  • Counterargument to Scholar C.F. Bauer: Bauer dated John’s writing to 160-170 AD; earlier dating supports eyewitness authorship
  • Historical Note: C.H. Roberts discovered the John Rylands fragment in 1934, which supports earlier dating
  • MORE KINGDOM QUESTION SERIES