Modern textual criticism, in the opinion of some of its leading minds, has given up its so-called search to recover the words of the original text or autographs. They are satisfied they cannot recover it, and seek now for the Ausgangtext (or texts), “a hypothetical, reconstructed text, as it presumably existed, according to the hypothesis, before the beginning of its copying.” Some more conservative (relatively speaking) text critics have pushed back against this. In the “Conclusion” of the book Can We Recover the Original Text of the New Testament (p. 87), editors Abidan Paul Shah and David Alan Black write:
“Lack of a settled original text only leads to a lack of a settled biblical theology which only leads to uncertain Christian doctrines and practice.”
This is most certainly true. No settled text = no settled theology = no settled faith and practice for modern Christians. Unfortunately, these authors’ solution is “to continue to practice a scientific approach to retrieving the original text of the New Testament.” What is the fruit of the scientific approach or method? The same kind of fruit against which they complain. Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the text leads to Christians tossed about by every wind of doctrine.
Let us look for a more stable foundation, a settled text that has been preserved and in the hands of the churches and Christians all along. Why go look for something you already have?
