Copies of the Autographs (to c. 150)

Most of the New Testament books were written during the second half of the first century. Those manuscripts were written under the direction of the Holy Spirit and were inerrant. They were undoubtedly written on papyrus and have all subsequently been lost. Nevertheless, the autographs of the New Testament were providentially copied and circulated before they became illegible or lost. These copies were made as early as a.d.95. If copying had not begun very soon after the autographs were written, there would be no Bible today because papyrus survives for long periods of time only under exceptional conditions. Just as the autographs were written on papyrus rolls, so the earliest copies were probably written on papyrus rolls. Soon, however, papyrus codices were produced, and parchment and vellum were employed still later. Very few, if any, of the early copies are extant today, for basically the same reasons as indicated with regard to the autographs (see chap. 20).

Although there were many early copies of the autographs, they are not all of the same quality, for as soon as a manuscript was copied misprints began to creep into the text. Some of the early copies were highly accurate and quite expensive, as they were copied by professional scribes. Manuscript copies made by less capable scribes were less expensive, but they were of a generally poorer quality and wider distribution.Still other copies made in this early period were quite poor in quality, as they were often copied by nonprofessionals and were often all that an individual or group could afford to have made. Gordon Fee correctly calls this a “Period of Confusion (to a.d. 400)” and adds that

during the second century in particular, when each NT book was being transmitted independently of the others and when there was wide geographical distribution of these documents with little or no “controls,” such scribal errors proliferated. Once an error was introduced into the text, it was then copied by the next scribe as his “received” text. Sometimes a scribe “corrected” what he thought to be errors and in doing so created errors of his own.^33[1]

majority text maybe corrupted...think about this.

---

³³ Gordon D. Fee, “The Textual Criticism of the New Testament,” in Frank E. Gaebelein, ed., The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, p. 425.

^[1]Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, Rev. and expanded. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986), 445–446.