How accurate is our modern New Testament compared to the original documents?

Question

This is a percentage based on manuscripts and transmission. Do you know it?

Answer 1

Good... There is no statistically valid way to compute it as you claim so it is a meaningless number.

In numeric terms, random copy error is demonstrably a non linear function. The odds of a given copyist making any type of error is a function of: time of day, length of time copying at a given session, sleep on recent nights, illumination of the scriptorium, emotional state, eye strain, quality of source document, even what the guy had for lunch. Most of these are non-discrete functions and are essentially non-quantifiable.
[Remember the studies that indicated most "lemon" automobiles came off the factory floor on a given day? The same idea holds here. There is no ACCURATE WAY to measure it.]

In light of this and with no objective data as to what the autographs were, there is no meaningful "number" which can be assigned.

If you believe the majority text theory, you can come close to a meaningful number, but the majority text theory IS NOT VALID in that:
1. It effectively assumes that ALL error is random.
2. It assumes that source documents at generation n are uniformly distributed, which is highly unlikely. Documents remaining at a scriptorium or library are more likely to be copied than those in individual possession.
3. It assumes an approximately constant manuscript lifetime.
4. It fails to distinguish the difference in "quality" of a 3rd century manuscript and one from the 13th century.

As for whynotaskdummy and the King James PER-version, the kjv has so many DELIBERATE fictitious readings as to be virtually unusable as a tool for understanding the original. Off hand, the ONLY version I know about with more DELIBERATE ERRORS is the jw's new world perversion.

... On statistically VALID numbers: From a manuscript evidence or linguistic analysis point of view, the "Longer Ending of Mark" is bogus. The change in the language is VERY dramatic in both form and vocabulary. Most scholars who read the material as I do, from the original Greek, feel that these few verses are not authentic. This leaves us with a document whose ending is either very rough, indicating that the author was prevented from completing it, or has been lost altogether.
If the original was lost, it likely was enough to throw the traditionally claimed 99.5% by several points. The claim is also rather deceptive in that it is not .5% of manuscripts have errors, rather 1 copy of every 200 is likely to have an incorrect reading on a given word. There are many different KINDS of errors which the claim fails to quantify.

norm s: No, rather it is closer to an inverse proportion. As time goes on, we find more second century manuscripts which INCREASES the reliability. Almost every major manuscript is now available in a variety of electronic formats - regular photographs, IR & UV light photos, etc.These documents will continue to age, but ttechnology is on our side. The vast amount of information available at out fingertips makes this process easier.

Answer 2

Hasn't the Bible been rewritten so many times that we can't trust it anymore?


This is a common misconception. Some people think that the Bible was written in one language, translated to another language, then translated into yet another and so on until it was finally translated into the English. The complaint is that since it was rewritten so many times in different languages throughout history, it must have become corrupted . The "telephone" analogy is often used as an illustration. It goes like this. One person tells another person a sentence who then tells another person, who tells yet another, and so on and so on until the last person hears a sentence that has little or nothing to do with the original one. The only problem with this analogy is that it doesn't fit the Bible at all.
The fact is that the Bible has not been rewritten. Take the New Testament, for example. The disciples of Jesus wrote the New Testament in Greek and though we do not have the original documents, we do have around 6,000 copies of the Greek manuscripts that were made very close to the time of the originals. These various manuscripts, or copies, agree with each other to almost 100 percent accuracy. Statistically, the New Testament is 99.5% textually pure. That means that there is only 1/2 of 1% of of all the copies that do not agree with each other perfectly. But, if you take that 1/2 of 1% and examine it, you find that the majority of the "problems" are nothing more than spelling errors and very minor word alterations. For example, instead of saying Jesus, a variation might be "Jesus Christ." So the actual amount of textual variation of any concern is extremely low. Therefore, we can say that we have a remarkably accurate compilation of the original documents.
So when that we translate the Bible, we do not translate from a translation of a translation of a translation. We translate from the original language into our language. It is a one step process and not a series of steps that can lead to corruption. It is one translation step from the original to the English or to whatever language a person needs to read it in. So we translate into Spanish from the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. Likewise we translate into the German from those same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts as well. This is how it is done for each and every language we translate the Bible into. We do not translate from the original languages to the English, to the Spanish, and then to the German. It is from the original languages to the English, or into the Spanish, or into the German. Therefore, the translations are very accurate and trustworthy in regards to what the Bible originally said.

New Testament
Date written: 1st Cent. A.D. (50-100 A.D.
Earliest copy: 2nd Cent. A.D. (c. 130 A.D.)
Approx. time period between original and copy: less than 100 years
Number of copies: 5600
Accuracy of copies: 99.5%

Answer 3

I am not a student of numbers, therefore can not give you a percentage of accuracy. However, the NT and the Bible all together weren't written originally or as they've been translated as a mathematical tool or question.

Instead they were written to transform our lives, showing us how and assisting us to grow more like Jesus and God. It is an instruction manual. Based on personal experience, using application of the currently translated material to reach an original document goal, I claim that the inaccuracies are so minimal that when used for it's original purpose, they don't even compute. While I have as yet be unable to master all of my personal issues, the document has given me the faith to belief that I will someday obtain my goal, which is to spend eternity in heaven with my heavenly Father, God and his son, my Savior Jesus.

The key component in the original text and the translation is faith, blind faith. The only way you obtain that is by studying with an open heart, His word, in a current translation or the original is you had it. Also by my experience, studying it once hasn't been enough. I find myself researching the same material multiple times in order to bring myself in line, as much as I am able, with the example left for me to read about.

Answer 4

When comparing the hebrew or greek copies there are very little translational issues between all the 24,000 copies of the New Testament. There are enough copyist mistakes that you could fill a half a page out of the 1044 pages of the Bible. That is how close we are between the New Testament manuscripts.

Answer 5

Mine is only one opinion, and you should get several on this issue. Translating from one language (and culture) to another is difficult, because the "second" language often has no exact equivalents. I believe translation of the Bible from early Greek and Hebrew texts was undertaken as a serious project with much prayer for guidance. Our familiar King James text is often criticized for inaccuracies by students of the Greek language. So we have many new "revisions" in an effort to improved accuracy or understanding. Good News For Modern Man is often preferred by young people. Go: www.biblegateway.com for about 50 versions --- many in foreign languages. You can type in a phrase or sentence and compare translations.

Answer 6

Since the NT was penned thousands of years ago by different unknown people, later to be handled by more unknown individuals with their own personal agendas, the NT may be quite different from the original documents. In addition to that, the whole Bible is a flawed, man-made book full of stories of fantasy and legends.

Answer 7

There are many modern translations, some more accurate than others. The most accurate translation currently available is probably the Douay-Rheims version. The original King James version was one of the least accurate translations, with more than 3,500 translational errors, but in the Revised King James version, most of those errors have been corrected.

Answer 8

Psalm 14:a million The idiot has stated in his center, “There isn't any God.” They are corrupt, They have performed abominable works, There is none who does well. Prov. thirteen:sixteen Every prudent guy acts with advantage, But a idiot lays open his folly.

Answer 9

Accuracy stopped after the KJV.

Horte and Westcott dug up old scrolls in the Vatican to "improve " the bible for the Vatican.....
Their work is the basis of the NIV, and all other perVERSIONS.

Answer 10

I figure if God is powerful enough to make a world out of nothing he is powerful enough to get the authorized version of the Bible the way he wanted it.