What is textual criticism?

from the old testament

• Textual criticism applied to the Old Testament compares Hebrew manuscripts and ancient translations to find the most probable wording of the original passage. The main Hebrew witnesses include the Leningrad Codex from the eleventh century and the Aleppo Codex from the tenth century, along with earlier materials like the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Greek Septuagint. Because these witnesses cover different centuries and regions, their similarities and differences help scholars carefully evaluate readings. This process considers existing evidence to identify and preserve the most plausible reading.
• A well-known example of textual criticism appears in Isaiah 53:11. Some English Bibles read, “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied” (ESV), while others include the phrase “he will see the light of life” (NIV). The difference comes from the manuscripts available to translators. The Masoretic Text, the traditional Hebrew Bible copied in the Middle Ages, does not contain the word light. But the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are more than a thousand years older, and the ancient Greek translation of Isaiah both include it.
• This raises the question: was the word light lost over time in the Hebrew tradition, or was it added later for clarity? Most scholars believe it was original since scribes were more likely to omit a short word than to add one. Still, many English translations follow the Masoretic Text as their base and therefore include “light” in a footnote, rather than in the main text.
• Either way, the meaning of the verse stays the same. The key point is that the Servant will triumph after suffering—He will see the result of His work and be satisfied. Including “light” emphasizes that vindication is like new life after darkness, but without it, the message remains the same: suffering leads to victory.

from the new testament

• For the New Testament, textual criticism examines nearly six thousand Greek manuscripts, along with ancient translations in languages such as Latin, Syriac, and Coptic, and a large network of quotations by early Christian teachers. Because manuscripts differ in age and location, scholars consider various factors like the earliest witnesses, the widest distribution of readings, and the consensus of manuscripts. This careful comparison aims to identify the wording that best explains how the different versions arose. Although a certain amount of “art” is involved in textual criticism—since different scholars may place more or less importance on certain types of data—the outcome is a disciplined, historical judgment based on concrete evidence.
• A common example of the results of textual criticism involves John 7:53–8:11 and Mark 16:9–20. The earliest and most diverse manuscripts do not include these sections. In contrast, many later manuscripts do contain them. Because a large number of manuscripts include these passages, they are often added but placed in brackets or accompanied by notes to indicate that they might not belong to the original text.
• Another example is John 5:4. That verse is not believed to have been written by John, which is why translations like the ESV leave it out of the main text and place it in a footnote. There, John 5:3–5 simply reads, “In these lay a multitude of invalids—blind, lame, and paralyzed. One man was there who had been an invalid for thirty-eight years.” However, others, such as the NASB, include it, but inside brackets as a warning to readers. In the 1995 NASB, John 5:3–5 reads, “In these lay a multitude of those who were sick, blind, lame, and withered, [waiting for the moving of the waters; for an angel of the Lord went down at certain seasons into the pool and stirred up the water; whoever then first, after the stirring up of the water, stepped in was made well from whatever disease with which he was afflicted.] A man was there who had been ill for thirty-eight years.” The explanatory sentence was probably not original and was added later as copies were made, likely inserting a circulating explanation into the passage. Textual critics have examined the evidence of all the available manuscripts and have high confidence that this verse is not original. While the explanatory sentence doesn’t change the story, because it introduces an extra-biblical belief about the pool, it is best left in the footnotes to keep the focus on John’s inspired account.
• In the end, although there are issues like these, none of them undermine the Bible's core teachings, including Jesus’s deity, His life, death, and resurrection, or the fact that He is the only way to be saved. In fact, what textual criticism has demonstrated is just how remarkably reliable our Bibles are!

implications for today

You can trust reading a good English Bible with confidence. The reason is simple: God has provided the church with a comprehensive and transparent paper trail—Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, early translations, and ancient quotes. Scholars have spent generations carefully comparing these texts to ensure accuracy. When there are significant differences in a passage, your Bible is honest about it, often noting them in footnotes. This openness should reassure you that nothing is being hidden—what you hold in your hands is the result of careful, honest work.

Just like early believers shared, protected, and verified their writings, today’s editors continue that same dedication to preserving the truth. Although a few minor differences remain, they don’t affect the core teachings of Christianity. These variations are clearly marked and openly discussed, so you can trust that the main message about knowing God through Jesus Christ stays the same.

If a footnote or bracketed section raises questions, don’t hesitate to ask a pastor or look into a trusted commentary. Curiosity is good, and asking questions helps us grow.

So, open your Bible with gratitude—read it, pray over it, and follow what it says. Behind every translation is a global, centuries-long effort to faithfully preserve and present the text.