Short answer
No. Not one of the original New Testament writings survives. What we have are copies of copies. The oldest piece is a scrap of John the size of a credit card, probably from the second century. The oldest complete New Testament, Codex Sinaiticus, was copied about 250 years after the books were written. From before about the year 200, when changes were easiest to make, only a few small scraps survive. Estimates put the differences among the copies at 200,000 to 400,000 or more. Most are slips of the pen. Some changes were made on purpose, and whole passages were added, such as the end of Mark. Several leading textual scholars have written that the original text cannot, or can hardly, be recovered. Islam teaches that God (﷾) Himself guards the Qur'an.
Full explanation
No originals, only later copies
No original of any New Testament book survives. Nor do the first copies of them. More than 5,700 Greek manuscripts (hand-copied books) are known, besides about 10,000 in Latin. No two are exactly alike. Most of them were copied many centuries after the books were written.
Stresses that no original of any New Testament book survives: we do not have the originals, nor the first copies of them, nor copies of those copies. What survive are copies made later, most of them many centuries later, and they all differ from one another.
Ehrman, who became a committed evangelical as a teenager and studied at Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton before his doctorate under Bruce Metzger at Princeton Theological Seminary, reports that more than 5,700 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament are known, besides about 10,000 in Latin. No two are exactly alike. Estimates of the differences among them run from 200,000 to 400,000 or more, so that there are more differences among the manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament. Most are immaterial slips such as spelling; some change the meaning of a passage. Most surviving copies are centuries later than the originals, and the earliest are few and mostly fragments.
The oldest pieces
The oldest fragment holds a few words of John 18. The oldest complete New Testament is Codex Sinaiticus, of the fourth century. Codex Vaticanus is from the same century, but it breaks off in Hebrews. Between the writing of the books and these copies lie about 250 years. Before about 200 only small scraps survive. The first larger papyri date from around 200 or later. A papyrus is a copy written on an old kind of paper made from reeds.
A scrap of papyrus about the size of a credit card, with a few words of John 18:31-33 on one side and 18:37-38 on the other. It is usually counted the oldest surviving piece of the New Testament. Its first editor, in 1935, dated it to the first half of the second century; some papyrologists now argue that a date later in the second century, or around 200, cannot be ruled out.
A Greek Bible copied in the fourth century, and the oldest surviving complete copy of the New Testament. Its Gospel of Mark ends at 16:8. After Revelation it also contains the Epistle of Barnabas and part of the Shepherd of Hermas, books that are not in today's New Testament.
A Greek Bible copied in the fourth century. Its Gospel of Mark ends at 16:8, and the scribe left the next column blank. The manuscript breaks off in Hebrews 9, so the end of its New Testament is lost.
Whole passages that were added
The gap is not empty of change. Four passages are missing from the oldest manuscripts. They are the last twelve verses of Mark and the story of the woman taken in adultery in John. The others are the confession of the Ethiopian in Acts 8:37 and the Trinity verse in 1 John 5:7. Christian textual scholars judge each of them a later addition. Yet the King James Version prints them all as scripture.
“Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.”
On the ending of Mark, reports that verses 9-20 are missing from the two oldest Greek manuscripts, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and from some early translations; that Clement of Alexandria and Origen show no knowledge of them; and that Eusebius and Jerome say the passage was absent from almost all the Greek copies they knew.
“So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
On the story of the woman taken in adultery (John 7:53-8:11), reports that it is absent from the early papyri (P66 and P75), from Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus and other early witnesses, and that the manuscripts which do carry it place it in different spots: after John 7:52, after John 7:36, at the end of John, or after Luke 21:38. Concludes that it was no part of the original Gospel of John.
“And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
On Acts 8:37, judges the verse a later addition. It is missing from the oldest witnesses, among them papyri 45 and 74 and the codices Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus and Ephraemi, and there is no reason a scribe would have left it out had it been original. He suggests a confession of faith used at baptism was written in the margin and later copied into the text.
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”
On 1 John 5:7-8, reports that the words about the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit are absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight late ones, four of which have them written in the margin as a later addition; that no Greek church father quotes them; and that every ancient translation except the Latin lacks them.
| Passage | In the oldest manuscripts? | In the King James Version? |
|---|---|---|
| The end of Mark, 16:9-20 | No | Yes |
| The woman taken in adultery, John 7:53-8:11 | No | Yes |
| The Ethiopian's confession, Acts 8:37 | No | Yes |
| The Trinity words, 1 John 5:7 | No | Yes |
Changes made on purpose
Most differences between the copies are slips of the pen, such as spelling. But some were deliberate. Bart Ehrman is a New Testament scholar who began as an evangelical Christian. He argues that scribes of the second and third centuries sometimes changed the words they copied. They did it so that the text supported their own belief about Christ more clearly.
Argues that in the second and third centuries scribes who held what became orthodox belief sometimes changed the texts they copied so that the texts supported their view of Christ more clearly, including his divinity. He treats the words 'Son of God' in Mark 1:1 as one such addition.
Ehrman, who became a committed evangelical as a teenager and studied at Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton before his doctorate under Bruce Metzger at Princeton Theological Seminary, reports that more than 5,700 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament are known, besides about 10,000 in Latin. No two are exactly alike. Estimates of the differences among them run from 200,000 to 400,000 or more, so that there are more differences among the manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament. Most are immaterial slips such as spelling; some change the meaning of a passage. Most surviving copies are centuries later than the originals, and the earliest are few and mostly fragments.
What textual scholars have written
Textual scholars study the copies to work out the first text. Robert Grant wrote in 1947 that it is generally recognised the original text of the Bible cannot be recovered. In 1963 he wrote that recovering what the New Testament writers wrote is well nigh impossible. Kenneth Clark told the Society of Biblical Literature in 1966 that it may be doubted there is one original text to recover. Merrill Parvis wrote in 1973 that the scholars' own critical editions differ so markedly that recovering the original is very difficult, if not impossible. Leading textual critics of recent decades, such as David Parker and Eldon Epp, make a similar point. They argue that the discipline cannot promise to recover the authors' own text.
Grant, a historian at the University of Chicago, writes that the primary goal of New Testament textual study remains the recovery of what the writers wrote, and that to achieve this goal is well nigh impossible.
Grant writes that it is generally recognized that the original text of the Bible cannot be recovered.
In his presidential address to the Society of Biblical Literature, Clark writes that great progress has been made in recovering an early form of the text, but that it may be doubted there is evidence of one original text to be recovered.
Parvis writes that the critical editions of the Greek New Testament differ markedly from one another, which suggests that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to recover the original text.
A leading textual critic argues that in the earliest period the Gospels were copied freely and kept changing, a "living text", so that the task of recovering a single original, authorial text of the Gospels cannot be achieved and should not be the goal.
Argues that "original text" has several different meanings in New Testament textual criticism (the text as the writer first wrote it, an earlier form behind it, the text a church later received as canon, and others), and that the discipline can no longer simply claim to be recovering the autograph.
Why Christians say the text is secure
Christians point out that the New Testament survives in more manuscripts, and earlier ones, than any other ancient book. They hold that the early text can be reached with confidence. Evangelicals, a large group of conservative Protestant Christians, also hold that the Bible is without error. But their best-known statement of this limits it to the original manuscripts.
Points out that the New Testament survives in far more manuscripts, and in copies closer to the time of writing, than any other ancient Greek or Latin work, whose earliest copies often come many centuries after their authors. The authors hold that this wealth of evidence lets scholars reach the early text with more confidence than for any other ancient book.
The best-known evangelical statement on the Bible. It affirms that Scripture is without error in all it teaches, and that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the original manuscripts (the autographs), which no longer exist. Copies and translations are the word of God only so far as they faithfully represent the original.
A book kept from the start
The Qur'an promises that God (﷾) Himself guards it. It never depended on one first copy. Many knew it by heart, and named scribes such as Zayd ibn Thabit wrote it down in the lifetime of the Prophet (ﷺ). Gabriel went over it with him once every year. After his death it was gathered into one volume within about two years. This was done from written pieces and from the memories of those who knew it by heart. So its text never depended on surviving first copies, and there is no gap of centuries to explain.
“We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).”
Zayd ibn Thabit reports that after many who knew the Qur'an by heart were killed at Yamama, Abu Bakr asked him to gather the Qur'an into one volume, reminding him that he used to write down the revelation for the Messenger of Allah. Zayd collected it from written pieces and from the memories of men, and the finished copy passed from Abu Bakr to Umar and then to Hafsa.
Abu Hurayra reports that Gabriel went over the Qur'an with the Prophet (ﷺ) once every year, and twice in the year he died.
Point by point
The Text of the New Testament (4th ed., 2005), on the number of witnesses
Points out that the New Testament survives in far more manuscripts, and in copies closer to the time of writing, than any other ancient Greek or Latin work, whose earliest copies often come many centuries after their authors. The authors hold that this wealth of evidence lets scholars reach the early text with more confidence than for any other ancient book.
Cited for
No ancient book has as many manuscripts as the New Testament, so its original text can be reconstructed.
The response
The count is of copies, and copies of copies. From before about 200 only small scraps survive. Many later copies cannot show what happened before the oldest one was made. Additions can be caught only where early copies survive to show them, and a change made in that early period could leave no trace.
Where it lands — The number of copies does not close the gap between the originals and the oldest surviving text.
Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978)
The best-known evangelical statement on the Bible. It affirms that Scripture is without error in all it teaches, and that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the original manuscripts (the autographs), which no longer exist. Copies and translations are the word of God only so far as they faithfully represent the original.
Cited for
The Bible is without error in the original manuscripts, and the many copies let scholars recover that text with great accuracy.
The response
The originals no longer exist, and there are hundreds of thousands of differences among the copies that do exist. Whole passages such as the end of Mark stood in printed Bibles for centuries. They still stand in the King James Version, although the oldest copies lack them. An error-free text that no one possesses cannot be read or checked.
Where it lands — Inerrancy of the originals is a claim about a book that no one has.
Perspectives
Mainstream Christian
The originals are lost, but the copies are so many and so early that the text God inspired can be recovered with confidence. No doctrine depends on a doubtful reading.
The New Testament has more manuscripts, closer to its writing, than any other ancient book.
Rebuttal
The count is real. But more copies do not close the gap: copies made later cannot show what the first copies said. From before about 200 only small scraps survive, and some changes were made on purpose.
The wealth of manuscripts lets scholars reach the original text with confidence.
Rebuttal
Scholars can reach an early form of the text. But Parker and Epp, leading textual critics of recent decades, doubt that one original can be recovered, as Grant, Clark and Parvis did before them. Ehrman argues scribes changed the text on purpose to support their belief about Christ, so the differences are not all spelling.
Scripture is without error in its original manuscripts.
Rebuttal
The statement itself limits this to the originals, and no original survives. Estimates put the differences among the copies at 200,000 to 400,000 or more. A claim about a book no one has cannot be read or checked.
Where the academy stands
Status: Consensus
Scholars agree that no autograph of any New Testament book survives and that all known copies differ from one another. Some leading textual critics now question whether the authors' own text can be recovered at all.
The Islamic perspective
The New Testament as first written is lost. What remains are later copies that differ and that men added to. The Qur'an, kept in writing and memory from the time of the Prophet (ﷺ), has no such gap.
No original manuscript of any New Testament book survives.
The oldest complete New Testament was copied in the fourth century, about 250 years after the books were written.
From before about the year 200 only small scraps survive, the oldest a few words of John.
Whole passages, including the end of Mark and 1 John 5:7, were added to the text later.
Some scribes changed the text on purpose to support their belief about Christ.
Several leading textual scholars have written that the original text cannot, or can hardly, be recovered. They range from Grant in 1947 to Parker in 1997.
The Qur'an was written down in the Prophet's (ﷺ) lifetime and collected into one volume soon after his death.
God (﷾) has promised to guard the Qur'an from corruption.