How the Westcott and Hort Lexicographical
Work Affected the Modern Bible Translators

Westcott and Hort are two notable figures in the field of biblical scholarship, particularly known for their Greek New Testament and their work on the textual criticism of the New Testament. Their contributions have had a profound impact on the study of the New Testament text, especially in the areas of textual reconstruction and lexicography.

1. Brooke Foss Westcott (1825–1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828–1892)

Westcott and Hort were British scholars who worked together on the Greek New Testament in the late 19th century. Their primary contribution was the publication of the "Greek New Testament" (commonly known as the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament) in 1881.

2. Westcott and Hort's Greek New Testament

Key Features:
- They produced a critical edition of the Greek New Testament that has had a major influence on modern textual criticism.
- Their approach was to base the New Testament text on earlier and more reliable manuscripts, particularly those from the Alexandrian text type, which they considered to be the most authentic form of the New Testament text.
- They rejected the Textus Receptus (which was the basis for the King James Bible) in favor of a more historically critical approach to the text. This involved comparing various ancient manuscripts, such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, and examining the variations between them.
Their Greek New Testament and Lexicographical Work:
- Westcott and Hort did not publish a lexicon themselves, but their Greek New Testament has influenced numerous subsequent lexicons and translations.
- The Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament provided the foundational text for many modern translations of the New Testament, including the Revised Version (RV) and later translations that followed the same textual tradition.

3. Their Approach to Textual Criticism

Westcott and Hort's approach to textual criticism was a radical departure from previous methods, and it has sparked significant debate over the years. Here are some key aspects of their work:

Alexandrian Text-Type Priority: They believed that the Alexandrian text-type, represented by early manuscripts like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, was the most reliable and should form the basis of the New Testament text. This view led them to downplay the Byzantine text-type (which underpins the Textus Receptus), and the Western text-type.
Eclectic Approach: Rather than following a single manuscript or tradition, Westcott and Hort advocated for an eclectic approach that selected readings from a variety of sources based on their age, geographical spread, and manuscript support.
Genealogical Method: They used the genealogical method, which classified manuscript families into groups based on common readings. They analyzed the relationships between manuscripts to determine the most likely original readings.

4. Theological and Textual Implications

The work of Westcott and Hort has had significant theological and textual implications:

Textual Integrity: Westcott and Hort’s work, particularly in favoring the Alexandrian text, raised concerns among those who upheld the Textus Receptus as the most reliable. Critics of their work argued that the Textus Receptus preserved a purer text, and that the Alexandrian readings introduced errors or omissions.
Doctrine of Preservation: Their preference for older manuscripts over the Textus Receptus led to debates about the doctrine of biblical preservation. Proponents of the Textus Receptus, such as those in the King James Bible tradition, maintain that the Bible was preserved through the Byzantine text-family, while Westcott and Hort’s followers believe that the Alexandrian text represents a more faithful reproduction of the original manuscripts.
Theological Concerns: Some critics of Westcott and Hort’s work have raised concerns about their theological views, particularly their more liberal views on certain doctrines, which they believed influenced their textual decisions. For example, they have been criticized for their views on the deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity.

5. Impact on Modern Translations

Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament became the foundation for many subsequent Bible translations:

Revised Version (RV): Their Greek New Testament was used as the basis for the Revised Version (RV), a major revision of the King James Bible.
Nestle-Aland and UBS Texts: The modern Greek New Testament editions, such as the Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies (UBS) texts, owe much of their textual approach to the principles laid out by Westcott and Hort.
Modern Translations: Many modern translations, such as the New International Version (NIV) and the English Standard Version (ESV), are based on the Alexandrian text tradition, with influences from Westcott and Hort’s work.

6. Criticism and Defense

Westcott and Hort’s work has faced both strong support and criticism:

Support:
- Their work is regarded by many scholars as a pioneering and scholarly contribution to the study of New Testament textual criticism.
- Their method of examining ancient manuscripts and evaluating textual variants has had lasting influence on the study of New Testament texts.
Criticism:
- Critics argue that their rejection of the Textus Receptus and the Byzantine text-family was a significant mistake, particularly in the light of the doctrine of the Bible’s preservation.
- Their theological views have also been questioned, with some believing that their liberal views may have influenced their textual decisions.

Conclusion

Westcott and Hort revolutionized the study of the Greek New Testament by providing an eclectic, scholarly approach to textual criticism. While their work has been instrumental in the development of modern biblical studies and translations, it has also been the subject of controversy, particularly for those who favor the Textus Receptus and Byzantine text-type as the basis for the New Testament. Their Greek New Testament is still highly influential, but the debates about their approach to the text continue to shape discussions in biblical scholarship today.

Liberal Views and Theological Biases

Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, while renowned for their scholarly contributions to textual criticism and their Greek New Testament, have been criticized for certain theological views and biases that some believe may have influenced their work. These concerns are mainly raised by those who hold to a more conservative or traditional view of biblical preservation and doctrine.

Below is a summary of the alleged liberal views, unscriptural beliefs, and theological biases attributed to Westcott and Hort, as well as their potential impact on their textual and lexical work:

1. Theological Views Questioned

A. Doubts about the Infallibility of Scripture

Criticism: It is alleged that both Westcott and Hort did not fully embrace the doctrine of the infallibility of Scripture, which teaches that the Bible is without error in all it affirms.
Potential Impact: Critics argue that a diminished view of the Bible’s inerrancy could lead to a willingness to alter or reject readings that do not align with their preferences or preconceptions.

B. Questioning the Creation Account

Westcott's View: He expressed doubt about a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account. In some writings, he hinted at reconciling Scripture with evolutionary theories.
Theological Concern: By undermining a literal interpretation of Genesis, some believe this demonstrates a tendency toward accommodating Scripture to fit modern scientific paradigms, potentially affecting their handling of texts related to creation and the fall.

C. Skepticism about Hell

Hort's View: Hort reportedly expressed doubts about the traditional doctrine of eternal punishment and Hell. He described the idea of Hell as a “crude and revolting distortion of the truth.”
Theological Concern: Critics argue that this perspective could lead to bias in passages dealing with judgment, punishment, and eternal damnation (e.g., Mark 9:43–48, Revelation 20:10).

D. Mary and the Saints

Westcott's View: Westcott showed reverence for Mary in his writings and admired some Catholic doctrines, such as the veneration of saints and images.
Theological Concern: This perceived lean toward Catholic theology raises concerns among those who uphold a sola scriptura stance, particularly when translating or evaluating texts that challenge Catholic traditions (e.g., Luke 1:28 and references to Mary).

2. Engagement with Mysticism and Occultic Influence

A. Involvement in the Ghostly Guild

Westcott and Hort were members of the Ghostly Guild, a group that investigated supernatural phenomena and spiritualist ideas.
Theological Concern: Critics argue that this involvement indicates an interest in mysticism or the occult, which may signal a compromised spiritual worldview. They question whether this could have influenced their approach to certain biblical texts dealing with spiritual warfare and the supernatural (e.g., Ephesians 6:12, 1 Peter 5:8).

B. Favoring Allegorical Interpretations

Both Westcott and Hort leaned toward allegorical and non-literal interpretations of Scripture in many areas, particularly regarding eschatology (the study of end times).
Potential Impact: Allegorical interpretations can lead to downplaying the literal promises of God, such as the Second Coming of Christ, the Millennial Kingdom, and the physical resurrection of believers.

3. Anti-Traditional Views

A. Opposition to the Textus Receptus

Westcott and Hort strongly rejected the Textus Receptus, the Greek manuscript tradition underlying the King James Version (KJV), labeling it as “vile” and “corrupt.”
Theological Concern: Their preference for the Alexandrian text-type (e.g., Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus) raised concerns about omissions and changes in key doctrines, such as:
- The deity of Christ (e.g., 1 Timothy 3:16 omits “God was manifest in the flesh” in Alexandrian texts).
- The Trinity (e.g., 1 John 5:7 is shortened in Alexandrian texts, omitting references to the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost).
- The Virgin Birth (e.g., Matthew 1:25 in Alexandrian texts omits the word “firstborn”).

B. Liberal Anglican Theology

Both men were clergy in the Church of England, which at the time was heavily influenced by higher criticism and liberal theology. This environment likely shaped their views on biblical interpretation and criticism.

4. Social and Philosophical Biases

A. Evolutionary Thinking

Hort, in particular, was influenced by Charles Darwin and was open to the idea of evolutionary development, which he believed could be reconciled with Christian theology.
Theological Concern: This perspective could lead to reinterpretations of passages dealing with creation, human origins, and sin (e.g., Genesis 1–3, Romans 5:12).

B. Ecumenism

Both Westcott and Hort supported efforts to promote unity among different Christian denominations, including Roman Catholicism.
Theological Concern: This ecumenical outlook could result in a softened approach to passages that emphasize doctrinal distinctives or warnings against false teachings (e.g., Galatians 1:8–9, 2 Peter 2:1).

5. Examples of Theological Bias Affecting the Text

Critics of Westcott and Hort point to specific textual decisions in their Greek New Testament where their theological biases may have influenced their judgment:

John 1:18
- Alexandrian Text: "The only begotten God" (favored by Westcott and Hort).
- Textus Receptus: "The only begotten Son."
- Concern: Critics argue that replacing "Son" with "God" undermines the clear relationship between Jesus as the Son of God and God the Father.
Mark 16:9–20
- Westcott and Hort omitted this passage, considering it a later addition.
- Concern: This omission removes references to the Resurrection, Ascension, and the Great Commission, all of which are central to the Christian faith.
Luke 2:33
- Alexandrian Text: "His father and mother marveled."
- Textus Receptus: "Joseph and his mother marveled."
- Concern: Critics argue that using "father" instead of "Joseph" undermines the doctrine of the virgin birth.

6. Conclusion

The alleged liberal views, theological biases, and unscriptural beliefs of Westcott and Hort raise questions about their motivations and the reliability of their textual decisions. While their scholarship is widely respected, their approach to textual criticism has been criticized for favoring manuscripts and readings that some believe dilute key Christian doctrines. Critics argue that their biases—rooted in liberal theology, allegorical interpretation, and ecumenical tendencies—could have influenced their work, especially in areas where textual variants affect fundamental doctrines.

References

The criticisms and alleged theological biases of Westcott and Hort are often cited by proponents of the Textus Receptus and defenders of the King James Version (KJV). These claims are supported by a variety of sources, including both their own writings and the critiques of their contemporaries and later scholars. Below are references to their own writings, as well as secondary sources discussing their views and the implications for their textual work:

Primary Sources: Writings of Westcott and Hort

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Gospel of the Resurrection (1866).
- In this work, Westcott discusses themes of allegory and rejects a literal interpretation of some biblical texts, such as the Genesis account.
Hort, Fenton John Anthony. The Christian Ecclesia (1897).
- Hort's views on the church, ecumenism, and broader interpretations of Scripture are presented here.
Westcott and Hort. The New Testament in the Original Greek (1881).
- Their landmark Greek New Testament text, which forms the basis for their textual decisions.
Hort’s Letters (e.g., Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort by Arthur Fenton Hort, 1896).
- In these letters, Hort expresses doubts about eternal punishment and other traditional Christian doctrines.
- Example: Hort wrote that Hell was a "crude distortion of the truth" (Vol. 1, p. 149).
Westcott’s Letters (e.g., Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott by Arthur Westcott, 1903).
- Westcott's personal correspondence reveals his reverence for Mary and doubts about the inerrancy of Scripture.
- Example: In one letter, he wrote about his admiration for Catholic practices like venerating saints (Vol. 1, p. 81).

Secondary Sources: Critiques of Westcott and Hort

Burgon, John William. The Revision Revised (1883).
- A staunch defender of the Textus Receptus and the KJV, Burgon critiqued Westcott and Hort’s textual methodology and theological biases.
Wilkinson, Benjamin G. Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930).
- Wilkinson argues against the Alexandrian text and highlights Westcott and Hort's alleged theological liberalism.
Fuller, David Otis. Which Bible? (1970).
- A collection of essays defending the KJV and critiquing the work of Westcott and Hort, particularly their rejection of the Textus Receptus.
Cloud, David W. The Modern Bible Version Hall of Shame (2001).
- Cloud provides a detailed critique of Westcott and Hort’s theological and textual positions, arguing that their views influenced modern Bible translations negatively.
Riplinger, Gail. New Age Bible Versions (1993).
- Riplinger suggests that Westcott and Hort’s theological liberalism and association with spiritualism undermined their work on the Greek New Testament.
Hills, Edward F. The King James Version Defended (1956).
- Hills defends the Textus Receptus and critiques Westcott and Hort’s rejection of traditional textual readings.

Key Points in Their Writings and Critiques

Doubts about Hell: Hort's skepticism of eternal punishment is documented in his letters (Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. 1, p. 149).
Admiration for Mary: Westcott's reverence for Catholic traditions is noted in Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott (Vol. 1, p. 81).
Textual Preferences: Their rejection of the Textus Receptus and preference for the Alexandrian text are detailed in The New Testament in the Original Greek (1881).
Alleged Spiritualism: Both men were involved in the Ghostly Guild, which is discussed in various secondary sources, including Riplinger’s New Age Bible Versions.

Critics' Theological Concerns with Their Text

Critics argue that specific textual decisions in the Westcott and Hort Greek New Testament align with their alleged theological biases, including:

Mark 16:9–20: Omitted entirely, removing a key resurrection account.
- Criticism Source: Burgon, The Revision Revised.
Luke 2:33: Replacing “Joseph and his mother” with “his father and mother.”
- Criticism Source: Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated.
John 1:18: Changing “the only begotten Son” to “the only begotten God.”

Criticism Source: Hills, The King James Version Defended.

G7-101010

Verse

Menu

Thursday, 16 January 2025