During my grad school days I briefly kicked around the idea of writing my thesis on the canon of the New Testament. For a number of weeks I poured over books detailing the canon, textual variants, text types…etc. Then I gave up. Why? Well, I realized that there are so many incredible men and women currently working in this field of study that I could never use my research to break new ground. So, I went in a totally different direction with my thesis. Anyway, that is a side note.
The newest book I have read on the New Testament text proves to me that I was quite right in admitting my research shortcomings. Daniel Wallace’s newest book, Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament (henceforth RCNT), does not “go where no man has gone before” but it does serve to stretch the bounds of where canon and textual studies have been for the past decade.
The first in a new series by Kregel Academic, RCNT quite clearly and decisively demonstrates that the popular understanding of the New Testament text touted by Bart Erhman is inherently inconsistent. Daniel Wallace opens the volume by providing one of the best, brief critiques of Erhman I have ever read (Although The Heresy of Orthodoxy is quite good as well). Going further, for my own field of research I found Matthew Morgan’s essay on the John 1:1 variant to be most helpful.
Written in an academic fashion, RCNT has a limited scope of readership in mind. Still, for those for whom this book was written, it would prove to be a useful resource for years to come. If you are interested in church history, canon development or simply want an academic handling of Bart Erhman…then RCNT is a must-read. Keep an eye on Kregel’s publishing schedule for further entries into this series.