This episode contends that believers should abandon an "all-or-nothing" approach to the reliability of translations of the Bible. As stated in the previous episode, the large number of textual variants is a natural bi-product of the more than 5,500 copies of the New Testament. Since most of the textual variants don't affect meaning (spelling, word-order, etc.), Christians can be confident that English translations of the Greek and Hebrew text are 99.9% faithful to the original autograph. Some are concerned that admission of doubt over the translation of ANY text places one on the slippery slope of skepticism leading to a shipwrecked faith. Miles Smith, one of the translators of the KJV, insisted in the preface that doubt was preferable to dogmatic claims of certainty where the meaning of a text was uncertain. "It is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, then to strive about those things that are uncertain." He acknowledges some room for doubt about the appropriate translation of a few passages, and this posture is preferable to unfounded confidence where "things are uncertain." He nevertheless affirmed the reliability of the KJV in the vast majority of translations, whose renderings amounted to "rubbing and polishing." The episode warns against unhealthy skepticism that quibbles over total certainty where compelling evidence is everywhere. Mark Twain remarked, "It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it's the parts that I do understand."
Textual Criticism: the Good, Bad, and Ugly
This episode initially describes the legitimate use of textual criticism, but then focuses on its abuse by skeptics like Bart Ehrman. Textual criticism simply refers to the science of approximating the original autograph based on analyses of numerous manuscript copies. The vast majority of textual variants don't affect meaning at all (see last episode). And since proponents of the Majority Text and textual criticism AGREE on 99.9% of text of the New Testament, "approximating the original autograph" only deals with one-thousandth of the text, and then only a tiny portion requires "approximating the original autograph" where the meaning differs significantly from other copies. Again, most textual variants don't affect meaning. The episode contains my testimony and initial negative encounter with textual criticism done from skeptical critics like Bart Ehrman, who typically exaggerate the significance of large numbers of textual variants, without differentiating between meaningful variants (very few) and insignificant variants like spelling, word order or inclusion/absence of the definite article. Dan Wallace at D.T.S notes that there are a 100 possible variations of "John loves Mary" in Greek. Coupled with the large number of copies of the New Testament (5,500+), the large number of insignificant variants is understandable and expected. The abuse of textual criticism by disingenuous critics is downright ugly, as the agenda is less informed by manuscript evidence as it is by pre-existing anti-supernatural bias.
What about “Textual Variants?”
This episode mostly addresses the issue of textual variants. The reason why Critical Text theorists insists on an "older is better" approach to manuscripts is that less chance exists of a copying error occurring when a manuscript is older, closer to the original autograph. Copying over the last 1,900 years has in fact led a large number of textual variants. A textual variant is a difference in wording between 2 or more texts. While this fact alone might cast doubt over transmission of the original autograph, as critics like Bart Ehrman point out, a "textual variant" includes numerous differences that don't change the meaning at all, especially spelling variants, inclusion or absence of the definite article, word order differences, and transposition of words. The vast majority of textual variants don't alter meaning AT ALL. None exists that would alter any central tenet of the Christian faith. Future episodes address the very few substantive variants.