Editing New Testament (section)

===Interpolations===
In attempting to determine the original text of the New Testament books, some modern textual critics have identified sections as additions of material, centuries after the gospel was written. These are called [[Interpolation (manuscripts)|interpolations]]. In modern translations of the Bible, the results of textual criticism have led to certain verses, words and phrases being left out or marked as not original. According to [[Bart D. Ehrman]], "These scribal additions are often found in late medieval manuscripts of the New Testament, but not in the manuscripts of the earlier centuries."{{sfn|Ehrman|2005|p=[https://archive.org/details/misquotingjesuss00ehrm/page/265 265]}}

Most modern Bibles have footnotes to indicate passages that have disputed source documents. Bible commentaries also discuss these, sometimes in great detail. While many variations have been discovered between early copies of biblical texts, almost all have no importance, as they are variations in spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Also, many of these variants are so particular to the Greek language that they would not appear in translations into other languages. For example, order of words (i.e. "man bites dog" versus "dog bites man") often does not matter in Greek, so textual variants that flip the order of words often have no consequences.<ref name="Strobel, Lee 1998"/>

Outside of these unimportant variants, there are a couple variants of some importance. The two most commonly cited examples are the [[Mark 16|last verses of the Gospel of Mark]]<ref>{{cite book |last=Nave |first=Guy D. |year=2002 |title=The Role and Function of Repentance in Luke-Acts |page=194}}</ref><ref>Spong, John Shelby (26 September 1979). [https://web.archive.org/web/20110604055133/http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1256 "The Continuing Christian Need for Judaism"]. ''Christian Century''. p. 918. Archived from [http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1256 the original] on 4 June 2011.</ref><ref>Levine, Amy-Jill; Blickenstaff, Marianne (2001). ''A Feminist Companion to John, Vol. II''. Feminist Companion to the New Testament and Early Christian Writings, Vol. 5. A&C Black. p. 175.</ref> and the story of [[Jesus and the woman taken in adultery]] in the Gospel of John.<ref>{{cite web | title = NETBible: John 7 | publisher = Bible.org | url = https://net.bible.org/#!bible/John+7 | access-date =17 October 2009}} See note 139 on that page.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last = Keith | first = Chris | title = Recent and Previous Research on the ''Pericope Adulterae'' (John 7.53–8.11) | journal = [[Currents in Biblical Research]] | volume = 6 | issue = 3 | pages = 377–404 | year = 2008 | doi = 10.1177/1476993X07084793 | s2cid = 145385075 }}</ref>{{sfn|Cross|Livingstone|2005|loc="Pericope adulterae"}} Many scholars and critics also believe that the [[Johannine Comma]] reference supporting the [[Trinity#Theology|Trinity doctrine]] in the [[First Epistle of John]] to have been a later addition.{{sfn|Ehrman|2005|p=80-83|ps=: "on one condition: that his opponents produce a Greeks manuscript in which the verse could be found (finding it in Latin manuscripts was not enough). And so a Greek manuscript was produced. In fact, it was produced for the occasion. It appears that someone copied out the Greek text of the Epistles, and when he came to the passage in question, he translated the Latin text into Greek, giving the Johannine Comma in its familiar, theologically useful form. The manuscript provided to Erasmus, in other words, was a sixteenthcentury production, made to order."}}{{sfn|Metzger|1994}} According to [[Norman Geisler]] and William Nix, "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% pure".{{sfn|Metzger|1994|p=367}}

[[File:RossanoGospelsChristBeforePilate.jpg|thumb|The [[Rossano Gospels]], sixth century, a representative of [[Byzantine]] text]]

The often referred to ''Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible'', a book written to prove the validity of the New Testament, says: "A study of 150 Greek [manuscripts] of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings... It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the New Testament in which the [manuscript] is wholly uniform."<ref>{{cite book |last=Parvis |first=M. M. |date=1962 |chapter=Text, [New Testament] |editor1-last=Buttrick |editor1-first=George A. |editor2-last=Kepler |editor2-first=Thomas S. |editor3-last=Knox |editor3-first=John |editor4-last=May |editor4-first=Herbert Gordon |editor5-last=Terrien |editor5-first=Samuel |editor6-last=Bucke |editor6-first=Emory Stevens |title=The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible: An Illustrated Encyclopedia |url=https://archive.org/details/interpretersdict04geor |url-access=registration |volume=4 (R–Z) |location=Nashville |publisher=Abingdon Press |page=595 |isbn=978-0-687-19273-1}}</ref>