English
Português
Español
Français
Answer
Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort were 19th-century theologians and Bible scholars. Together, they produced The New Testament in the Original Greek, one of the earliest examples of modern textual criticism. Since its publication in 1881, Westcott and Hort’s work has proven to be remarkably accurate, though not flawless. Their approach not only advanced the science of textual criticism but also lent significant support to the assertion that the Bible had been safeguarded from tampering and corruption.
The aim of textual criticism is to eliminate changes, errors, and additions in a text to ascertain the original words. For instance, the King James translators based their work on a series of manuscripts, none of which precisely matches their final product. They selected between variant readings or spellings, determining what was most likely original through various techniques. Acknowledging the importance of incorporating previous scholarship with new findings, the KJV translators made a sincere effort to build upon existing work. This process continues today, albeit with a significantly larger number of manuscripts available. The discrepancies among the different texts are minor, representing less than half of one percent of the words in the New Testament.
Not all textual critics employ the same methodologies or assign equal significance to specific manuscript families. The particular approaches utilized by Westcott and Hort are no longer considered ideal by Bible scholars. Contemporary research views their methodology as excessively reliant on two manuscripts, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, as well as the principle of “shorter is earlier.” Consequently, although the practical differences are minimal, The New Testament in the Original Greek does not serve as the foundation for any modern Bible translation. Instead, English translations today typically draw from the United Bible Societies and Nestle-Aland critical texts.
Unfortunately,Unfortunately, Westcott and Hort are still notorious names in relation to the Bible, despite their text not serving as the foundation of any major modern translations. Most references to the duo today come from critics of their work, especially those who endorse the King James Only movement (KJVO). These critics tend to concentrate solely on Westcott’s and Hort’s unorthodox spiritual beliefs. In reality, both men adhered to several ideas that contemporary conservative Christianity would deem heretical. However, the same can be said for church fathers like Origen, Jerome, and Augustine. Additionally, it is noteworthy that the King James translators themselves supported Anglicanism, infant baptism, and similar beliefs.
One of the significant strengths of the Bible as a sacred text is its manuscript evidence. Even when compared to secular works, the Bible has more early, preserved copies than any other ancient text. The value of Westcott and Hort’s work lies in its ability to be scrutinized, tested, and amended where evidence justifies such corrections. Similar to other Bible scholars such as Erasmus, Wycliffe, and Tyndale, Westcott and Hort built upon the achievements of their predecessors and created a scholarly tool for Bible study.
