Autographs

As most Bible scholars are well aware, but most churchgoers may not be, the autographs, which were penned by actual Bible writers (Paul, Peter, John, Luke, and so on), or dictated to a scribe by the actual Bible writer, are no longer available. For example Paul would have dictated what was to become 1 and 2 Thessalonians to Silas, his scribe, who would have taken things down in shorthand. Afterward, Silas would have created a rough draft from the dictation notes, at which point, he and Paul would have made corrections. Thereafter, Silas would have made a master-copy, which is known as the originally published work, the official copy, from which other copies would be made. The apostle John  and others, who penned their own original, would create a published version as well, meanin that would not be that much difference between the autograph and the original. These were written on perishable materials that would soon decayor were destroyed by enemies within the first two centuries of the Christian era.

Corrector

A Corrector is one who checked the manuscripts for needed corrections. Corrections could be by three primary persons: (1) the copyist himself, (2) by the official corrector of the scriptorium, and (3) by the person who had purchased the copy. Hand: This refers to the person who is making the copy, distinguishing his level of training. Paleographers have set out four basic levels of handwriting. First, we have the common hand of a person who is untrained in making copies. Second, there is the documentary hand of a person who is trained in preparing documents. Third, there is the reformed documentary hand of a person who is experienced in the preparation of documents and copying literature; and fourth, the professional hand of a person who is a professional scribe.

Authorized Text, Exemplar, and Scriptorium

Authorized Text (Archetypal Manuscript): A text used to make other copes.

Exemplar: The authoritative text of a New Testament book from which other copies were made; if in a scriptorium, an archetype; if in a congregation or home, a master-copy.

Scriptorium: A scriptorium is a room where multiple scribes or even one worked to produce manuscript(s). A lector would read aloud from the exemplar, as the scribes(s) would write down the material.

Rough Draft (term used in textual criticsm)

Rough Draft is the copy that was created from the shorthand copy taken down by a scribe. Both the scribe and the author would have corrected this, and the product would have been considered and called the authorized text.

Original (term used in textual criticism)

Original is the text by one of the New Testament writers when it was initiallly taken down by a scribe or penned by the author. After it was corrected, it would have been used as the first archetype for making copies.

Autograph (term used in textual criticism)

An 'autograph' is the first written text by the New Testament author, or by the New Testament author, or by the scribe would take it down in shorthand and turn it into a rough draft that would be corrected by both the scribe.

Defining Important Terms

A list below are some terms that we often hear when discussing textual criticism.

1. Autograph

2. Original

3. Rough Draft

4. Authorized Text

5. Exemplar

6. Scriptorium

7. Corrector 

8.Autograpjhs

Microevolution vs Macroevolution

This is the belief that all life forms have descended from a common ancestor - the first one-celled creature-and all of this happened by natural process without any intelligent intervention. God was not involved. It has been a completely blind process.

Darwinists say this happened by natural selection. But the term "natural election" is a misnomer. Since the process of evolution is, by definition, without intelligence, there is no "selection" at all going on. It's a blind process. The term "natural selection" simply means that the fittest creautures survive. That's true by definition - the fittest survive (this is called a tautology - a circular argument that doesn't prove anything). Logically, these are the creatures that are best equipped genetically or structurally to deal with changing environmental conditions (that's why they survive).

As an example of "natural selection," consider wat happens to bcteria attacked by antibiotics. When bacteria survive a bout with anitibiotics and multiply, that surviving group of bcteria may be resistant t that atibiotic. The surviving bcteria are resistant t tat antibiotic because te parent bacteria possessed the genetic capacity t resist, or arare biochemical mutation somehow helped it srvive (we ay "rare" because mutations are nearly always hrmful). Since the sensitive bacteria die, the surviving bacteria multiply and now dominate.

Darwinists say that the surviving bacteria have evolved. Having adapted to the environment, the surviving bacteria provide us with an example of evolution. Fair enough, but what kind of evolution? This is where Darwinian errors and false claims begin if not checked by those who believe observation is important to science. Here's what observation tells us: the surviving bacteria always stays bacteria. They do not evolve into another type of organism. That would be macroevolution. Natural selection has never been observed to create new types.

But macroevolution is exactly what Darwinists claim from the data. They say hese observable micro canges can be extrapolated to prove that unobservable macroevolution has occured. They make no distinction between microevolution and macroevolution, and tus use te evidence for micro to prove macro. By failing to make this critical distinction, Darwinists can dpe the general public ito tinking that ay observable change in any oganism proves that all life has evolved from te first one-celled creature.

This is why it is essential that the right distinctions be made and that all hidden assumptions be exposed when discussing the creation-evolution controversy.

Specified complexity

Forget the Darwinist assertions about men descending from apes or birds evolving from reptiles. The supreme problem for Darwinists is not explaining how all life forms are related. For unguided, naturalistic macroevolution to be true, the first life mus have generated spontaneously from nonliving chemicals. Unfortunately for Darwinists, the first life - indeed any form of life - is by no means "simple." This became clear in 1953 when James Watson and Francis Crick discovered DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), the chemical that ecodes instructions for buildings and replicating all living things. DNA has a helical structure that looks like a twisted ladder. The sides of the ladder are formed by alternating deoxribose and phosphate molecules, and the rungs of the ladder consist of a specific order of four nitrogen bases. The nitrogen bases are adenine, thymine, cytosine, and guanine, which commonly are represented by the letters A,T,C, and G. These letters comprise what is known as the four-letter genetic alphabet. This alphabet is identical to our English alphabet in terms of its ability to communicate a message, except that the genetic alphabet has only four letters instead of twenty-six. Just as the specific order of the letters in this sentence communicates a unique message, the specific order of A,T,C, and G within a living cell determines the unique genetic makeup of that living entity. Another name for that message or information, whether it's in a sentence or in DNA, is "specified complexity." In other words, not only is it complex - it also contains a specific message. 

This incredible specified complexity of life becomes obvious when one considers the message found in the DNA of a one-celled amoeba (a creature so small, several could be lined up in an inch). Staunch Darwinist Richard Dawkins, admits that the message found in just the cell nucleus of a tiny amoeba is more than all thirty volumes of Encyclopedia BrItannica combined, and the entire amoeba has much information in ita DNA as 1,000 complete sets. 

So here's the question, a simple message such as this one, requires an intelligent being, then why doesn't a message of 1,000 encyclopedias long require one?

Darwinists can't answer that question by showing how natural laws could do the job. Instead, they define the rules of science so narrowly that intelligence is ruled out in advance, leaving natural laws as the only game in twn. 

An Immense Amount of Manuscripts

Today, we have a veritable storehouse of manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures. By comparison, a mere handful of manuscripts, represent other ancient writings, and these are centuries removed from their originals. Fifty manuscripts can be attributed to the plays of Aeschylus, with 100 going to Sophocles, a mere one manuscript each to Titus' Greek Anthology and Annals, three Catullus' poems, and about as Euripides, Cicero, Ovid, and Virgil. On the other hand, the New Testament has some 5,750 manuscripts in Greek, 10,000 in Latin, and 1,000 in other languages, giving us a total of close to 15,000 manuscripts. Even though many are fragments, some are a sizeable portion, and others are a whole. It must be kept in mind that the 27 books of the Christian Greek Scriptures were originally penned in the latter part of the first century [50 - 100 C.E.]; with over 100 of these papyrus manuscripts that are extant (still in existence), having been dated between 110 and 300 C.E.

Textual Criticism The Fundamentals

Many Christians whom I have asked if they knew what 'textual criticism' was don't have the slightest idea. I hear often times, "what's that?"

Textual Critiscism is not to be confused with Higher Criticism. TC is the study of any written work of which the autograph is unknown, with the purpose of assertaining the original text. Hundreds of textual scholars over the last 400 - years have given their lives to this work. One can feel most confident that our NA27 and our UBS4 master Greek texts are predominately the same as the originals that were penned so long ago. Bible scholars Norman L. Geisler and William Nix conclude: "The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book - a form that is 99.5 percent pure."

So, Textual Criticism is both an art and a science. It is a science because it has principles or guidelines that must be followed. Additionally, it is an art because it is all about balance in applying those principles. It is a careful comparison of all known original language manuscripts (including lectionaries) and versions of the Bible in other languages (for example, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian), as well as patristic quotations in order to determine the original reading. This would include the elimination of any additions that may have crept into the text, as well as restoring any portion that may have been removed by accident. This work is often referred to as "lower criticism," which is constructive criticism; it should be set be set apart from "higher criticism," which is typically destructive criticism.