In this volume Alan Mugridge reviews claims that scribes of New Testament manuscripts altered the text of their copies to further their own beliefs, to stop people using them to support opposing beliefs, or for some other purpose. He discusses the New Testament passages about which these claims are made in detail, noting their context, exegesis, and supporting manuscripts. He concludes that while a small number of such claims are valid, most are doubtful because, unless a scribe's habits are clear in one manuscript, we cannot know how the changes came about, why they were made, who made them, and when they were made. He argues that the bulk of the erroneous readings in New Testament manuscripts reviewed were made by scribal slips during the copying process, and not in order to further anyone's personal agenda, adding strength to the reliability of the Greek New Testament text available today, despite the need to refine current editions to be as close as possible to the original text.
In this volume Alan Mugridge reviews claims that scribes of New Testament manuscripts altered the text of their copies to further their own beliefs, to stop people using them to support opposing beliefs, or for some other purpose. He discusses the New Testament passages about which these claims are made in detail, noting their context, exegesis, and supporting manuscripts. He concludes that while a small number of such claims are valid, most are doubtful because, unless a scribe's habits are clear in one manuscript, we cannot know how the changes came about, why they were made, who made them, and when they were made. He argues that the bulk of the erroneous readings in New Testament manuscripts reviewed were made by scribal slips during the copying process, and not in order to further anyone's personal agenda, adding strength to the reliability of the Greek New Testament text available today, despite the need to refine current editions to be as close as possible to the original text.
