Customer Reviews

The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th Edition)

5 star:		(20)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Dr. Metzger has given the reader an invaluable resource for the study of the text of the New Testament. The book is divided into three major parts. Part one begins with a detailed description of the ancient method of bookmaking. Next, Metzger lists the major Greek manuscripts and codices as well as a basic description of each. He also lists the major non-Greek witnesses (e.g. Syriac, Coptic, Latin, etc.) and discusses the role of quotations from the early church Fathers. Part two is devoted to the history of the printed editions of the Greek New Testament from the time of the Complutensian Polyglot and the Textus Receptus (the text used for the KJV) through Westcott and Hort until the present day. Part three is an instruction manual for textual criticism, including the many theories of criticism and the method of conjectural emendation. In this section, Metzger also discusses the many types of errors and deliberate changes made by the scribes. He then gives an analysis of several textually difficult passages (e.g. Mark 16 and Acts 20:28). The book also includes 16 photo plates that show selected manuscripts. A working knowledge of Greek is helpful because Metzger often cites Greek words in the text and footnotes without an English translation. If one wishes to learn the basics (and more) about textual criticism, then this is the book to buy.

This book is a vital tool to use in rebutting the Ex Cathedra heresies of the King James Onlyists. Virtually every page contains important information that the KJOs would rather not discuss. (Or discuss out of context, if they acknowledge it at all.) And while this book isn't devoted to KJVOism per se, it is a great resource for the anyone who actually wants to examine the evidence for himself, rather than relying on the words of Ruckman, Riplinger, Cloud, Waite, Grady, etc...

For example, while Westcott-Hort are condemned by the KJVO crowd, Erasmus is practically placed on a throne and his own heresies are ignored. His tampering with the text is overlooked while Westcott-Hort are branded as every sort of apostate and heretic imaginable. One standard is applied to Westcott-Hort, another is applied to Erasmus.

Was the text perserved? Of course it was. Just not in the manner that some would have you believe. There was no additional "moving" of the Spirit over Erasmus, the KJV translators, or Benjamin Blayney to prevent them from making errors. Let Rome have it's Ex Cathedra doctrine.

A word of warning: This book is deep. It goes into a lot of detail regarding various Greek and Latin manuscripts, as well as early versions and Patristic quotations. It takes time to absorb everything this book contains. But don't give up! To truly understand the implications and details of the whole Bible version controversy, one needs a working knowledge of just how the Bible itself was transmitted down through history.

If you are interested in learning how the New Testament we read today came to be -- read this book. It is a tremendous overview of the sources that have been relied on that, taken together, make up the New Testament as we now understand it. It is fascinating to read about the divergences between different versions of the scriptures and the reasons for these differences, i.e., inattentive scriveners, etc. For those who may feel uncomfortable with this I should point out that Metzger is not seeking to undermine belief in the scriptures, in fact, he is the editor of the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. However, he at no point allows his beliefs to interfere with his objective examination of the evidence. Obviously, he believes that such an examination should not undermine belief. As he states, no fundamental tenet of Christianity is impacted by the sometimes divergent readings in ancient manuscripts. Highly recommended.

This is the classic work on New Testament textual criticism. It is thorough, clear, and actually entertaining. However, it does need rewriting. The text of the book has not been changed since 1968. The author has just added appendices as new evidence comes to light. This makes the book a little cumbersome at times to read. Rewriting the appendices into the body of the text would make this book even more useful.

***************
UPDATE: This review was written about the 1992 edition. The 2005 edition addresses my criticisms.

Dr. Metzger's landmark encompasses a lifetime of scholarly work in the field of textual criticism and represents one of the best fundamental texts on the subject. While some have critized his method (Alexandrian and throughly influenced by Westcott and Hort), his research is impeccable and writing style emminently readable. A must for those who are being introduced to this complex and broad field of study.

This 4th edition updates a classic by Metzger. The new co-author that joins the aging Metzger is from the liberal end of the spectrum, and a few of the new views expressed in the 4th edition put a lot of weight on a very few manuscripts that agree with a liberal interpretation. There is thus a section on the "Oppression of Women", for example. Although Metzger's well-balanced approach is thus in jeopardy, the book is on the whole a useful update to the 3rd edition.

For clearness of exposition and soundness of principles, and even correct if not beautiful typographical appearance, this is the best introduction ever to NT Textual History and Criticism.

OK, the Eberhard NESTLE book of some ninety years ago is again available and is a well thought-of German pedagogical feat of a textbook, glory to it!_ but, truly, it's also painfully outdated.

So, what? It's true that the updating of the third edition isn't done in the best possible way_ but, what do we have to offer? The ALAND and ALAND handbook? Of course, it is a good repository of the latest data in the field, but a good, readable textbook it isn't.

The 4th edn (METZGER, EHRMAN,The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th Edition) OUP) is really an updated and improved revision of METZGER's now classical text, well done and helpful overall. For sheer quantity of raw material the ALANDs still hold the sway, but theirs is in no way a readable or agreeable book.

So, I think it's on the whole better to stick to METZGER, and -for a good updating- to get the EHRMAN, HOLMES bookThe Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis. And don't forget the recent book by COMFORT,P.W.Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography & Textual Criticism

Metzger's book is a fabulous read for anyone serious in academic study of NT Textual Criticism (TC). Metzger introduces the reader to every possible arena of knowledge within the world of TC. From his opening sections on writing materials, types, and styles to his latter chapters on how to use TC, Metzger poignantly gives the reader everything he/she needs to know. Metger also does a great job at giving examples of meangingful papryri, manuscripts, and other documents. The only down side to Mezger's book is that it is not an "easy read." Certainly the information is somewhat taxing, however, it is profitable to anyone who wants to learn the basics (and some advanced level information) of NT TC. All-in-all the book deserves five stars...it is simply an indispensible book.

I have used Metzger for over thirty years - all through the first three editions. Now for the fourth edition, the liberal higher critic, Bart Ehrman has been allowed to inject his tendential ideas. And, in my opinion, it has ruined the book. I am not doubting Ehrman's credentials - he was a student of Metzger - but he has an agenda, and that is evident in his additions to this edition. His feminism and radical view of early Christianity, as evidenced in his many other works, mars a classic work that deserved better treatment. Trust me, Metzger's theology is not shared by Ehrman. And his theology comes through, although textual criticism should not be agenda driven. I know that I will be skewered by some readers, but in my opinion a classic in the field has been marred by an editor who wants to steer readers away form the facts and toward his bias.
If you don't know what I am talking about, just read his "Orthodox Corruption of Scripture" and his "Misquoting Jesus."
Give me back the third edition of this work - and spare me the musings of a man who admits he now denies the faith he once espoused.

If someone wants to know how we got the New Testament this would definately be the book I would recommend. Metzger starts off explaining how copies were made he then goes on to discuss the various versions and biblical manuscripts that survive. He then goes onto talk about the various Textus Receptus versions, Westcott & Hort and Textual Criticism. This is a good book if you're interested in how we got the New Testament and I would give it five stars even though it is a bit dated. The Appendix attempts to update it but it doesn't do a good job the text should've been rewritten.

The problem with this book is it's dated. Since it was written some quite substantial manuscript discoveries have been made. Metzger is bias towards the Alexandrian text and relentlessly degrades the Byzantine text at every opportunity the reader should not ignore this. However, he takes the Westcott & Hort approach that the Byzantine was very late and has no ancient readings. He presents a very compelling argument that validates his view. However, the Chester Beatty Papyri and Bodmer Papyri of around 200 AD disprove his theory entirely. These were found after this book's publication and I do believe Metzger has updated this title.

Going on the attitude of this book I don't think this will be enough to sway Metzger's view on the Byzantine text. He does note these discoveries in the Appendix but he trivialises their significance. In my opinion nothing short of a miracle is going to change Metzger's attitude on the Byzantine text. Now I don't want readers to think I'm a King James/Textus Receptus supporter because I'm not far as I am concerned they're archaic and should be treated as such. Its just I don't believe the Byzantine text was as corrupt as Metzger makes it out to be and from my own research it is not as bad as he makes it out to be.