Daniel B. Wallace Reviews Craig L. Blomberg’s “Can We Still Believe the Bible?”

Though this piece by Wallace is billed as a review of Blomberg’s work, it is essentially a review of Blomberg’s first chapter -“Aren’t the Copies of the Bible Hopelessly Corrupt?” – a subject on which Wallace is even more expert than Blomberg.

Here are some quotes of Wallace from the review:

Almost anyone who has spent time with the textual apparatus is amazed at how little the vast majority of variants affect the meaning of the text.

But, with regard to Blomberg’s point, it also shows that if history is any indication, it would be foolish to think that any not-yet discovered readings will some day grace the text of our critical Greek New Testaments instead of finding a place in the apparatus of also-rans.

In comparing the copies of the NT with other ancient Greco-Roman literature, Blomberg argues well that Christians need not feel embarrassed about the relatively small gaps between the originals and the earliest copies (most NT books have copies within a century of the completion of the NT), since the gaps for other literature are far greater (hundreds of years). Further, the differences between the copies for, say, the apocryphal literature is remarkably greater than for the NT copies.

(13 min read; 3,226 words)

 

Can We Still Believe the Bible? | Daniel B. Wallace.

This entry was posted in Attestation & Corroboration, Book Notices & Reviews, NT Textual Reliability, Textual Issues. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Daniel B. Wallace Reviews Craig L. Blomberg’s “Can We Still Believe the Bible?”

  1. Pingback: Is the Original New Testament Lost? Ehrman v. Wallace Debate | Reference Shelf for the Kingdom of God

Comments are closed.