The popular dawah claim — there are 400,000 variants in the New Testament manuscripts, more than there are words — is technically true and substantively misleading. The 400,000 figure counts every spelling difference, dropped article, and word-order change across more than 5,800 Greek manuscripts. The number of variants that are both meaningful (changing the sense) and viable (with a plausible claim to being original) is not 400,000. By the published count of Daniel Wallace and the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, it is closer to fewer than 1,500, and not one of them affects a major Christian doctrine. The discipline of textual criticism — built on early papyri (P52 c. 125 AD), the great fourth-century codices (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus), the Editio Critica Maior project, and centuries of careful rabbinic-and-patristic comparison — is the most rigorous textual scholarship any ancient document has ever received. The text we read in the NA28 / UBS5 critical editions is, by overwhelming consensus of working textual critics including the most skeptical, substantially what the apostles wrote.
How textual critics actually work
Textual criticism is not guesswork. It is a methodologically careful, peer-reviewed scholarly discipline. Here is how it works.
The manuscript types. New Testament manuscripts come in four major categories. Papyri — written on Egyptian papyrus, the earliest writing material; numbered with a 𝔓 prefix (𝔓52, 𝔓46, 𝔓66, 𝔓75). Uncials (or majuscules) — written in capital Greek letters, typically on parchment, the dominant type from the 4th to the 9th centuries; numbered with a leading zero (01 = Sinaiticus, 03 = Vaticanus). Minuscules — cursive lower-case Greek, the dominant type from the 9th century on; numbered without a prefix (1, 33, 1739). Lectionaries — manuscripts used in church reading, with passages selected and ordered for liturgical use; numbered with an l prefix.
The published catalogue, the Liste of the INTF at Münster, lists more than 5,800 Greek manuscripts. By comparison, the runner-up among classical works — Homer's Iliad — has roughly 1,800.
The early papyri. 𝔓52 (the John Rylands fragment, c. 125 AD) preserves a few verses of John 18 and is the oldest extant NT manuscript — within roughly thirty years of the autograph. 𝔓46 (c. 175-225 AD) preserves most of the Pauline corpus. 𝔓66 and 𝔓75 (c. 175-200 AD) preserve substantial portions of the Gospels. By 250 AD, the manuscript witness covers most of the New Testament.
The great codices. Codex Sinaiticus (c. 330-360 AD) preserves the entire New Testament, the Old Testament in Greek, and several other early Christian writings — and is fully digitised online. Codex Vaticanus (c. 300-325 AD) preserves the Greek Bible with some lacunae. Codex Alexandrinus (5th century) and Codex Bezae (5th century) extend the witness with notable variant traditions. The combined evidence from the early papyri and the great codices means the New Testament text is the best-attested document from the entire ancient world.
Variant types. Of the roughly 400,000 textual variants Ehrman counts in Misquoting Jesus, the overwhelming majority are spelling (e.g., the word John spelled with one n or two), word order (Greek is highly inflected; word order is largely indifferent), added or dropped articles (Greek articles function differently from English), harmonisations (a copyist conforming a verse in Matthew to its parallel in Mark), and missing or duplicated words due to homoeoteleuton (the eye skipping from one similar ending to another). Daniel Wallace's published taxonomy classifies variants in four buckets:
- Meaningless and not viable (the bulk — spelling, word order, etc.)
- Viable but not meaningful (variants with a plausible claim to originality but no impact on the sense)
- Meaningful but not viable (variants that change the sense but cannot plausibly be original — e.g., obvious copyist errors)
- Meaningful and viable — variants where the original wording is still being argued by working textual critics. This is the small set that matters.
Wallace estimates fewer than 1,500 meaningful and viable variants exist across the entire NT corpus. Even granting that count, no Christian doctrine turns on any of them.
What this looks like in practice
Three concrete examples make the discipline vivid.
Mark 1:41 — moved with compassion vs moved with anger
Mark 1:41 describes Jesus healing a leper. The traditional reading is moved with compassion (Greek splagchnistheis); a small number of important manuscripts read moved with anger (Greek orgistheis). Bart Ehrman has argued for the latter on internal grounds (the harder reading is more likely original) and external grounds (the manuscripts that read anger are early). Most modern critical editions — including the NA28 — print compassion as the better-attested reading and footnote anger.
This is exactly what a meaningful and viable variant looks like. The word change is meaningful (Jesus's emotional state in healing this man); both readings are viable (each has manuscript support and a plausible theological history). Working textual critics have not reached consensus. The discipline does not pretend it has. No Christian doctrine — including Christology — turns on which reading is original.
John 7:53-8:11 — the woman caught in adultery
The famous pericope adulterae — the woman caught in adultery — is missing from the earliest and best Greek manuscripts (𝔓66, 𝔓75, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus) and from many Patristic citations. It appears in later manuscripts, sometimes in different locations in John, and once at the end of Luke. Bruce Metzger's classic work lists it as a later interpolation; the NA28 brackets it; modern Bibles footnote it.
The Christian response is not to hide this but to be the first to mention it. The pericope is probably not part of John's original Gospel — though it may be authentic Jesus tradition that floated for a generation before being inserted. Either way, no Christian doctrine — including the doctrine of forgiveness — depends on this one passage. Other clear texts (Luke 7:36-50, John 4, 1 John 1:9) carry the same theological weight.
1 John 5:7-8 — the Comma Johanneum
The King James Version of 1 John 5:7-8 reads For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth... The italicised words are absent from every Greek manuscript before the 14th century. They appear in only four later Greek manuscripts (out of 5,800+) and in Latin Vulgate manuscripts from about the 5th century.
The Christian response, again, is to be the first to admit this. The Comma is not original to the Greek text. Modern critical editions exclude it. The doctrine of the Trinity does not turn on the Comma — the Trinity is established from the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19), John 1:1, Philippians 2:5-11, and many other clear passages. This is what mature textual criticism in service of doctrine looks like — willing to give up a verse and stronger for it.
What this means for Christian-Muslim dialogue
Popular dawah relies heavily on Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus — usually without having read the rest of Ehrman's work or any of the responses. The Christian engager who has read the field is at a steep advantage.
What Ehrman actually says. In the appendix to Misquoting Jesus and in his interview with Lee Strobel (Jesus Outside the New Testament), Ehrman concedes: Essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament. The popular dawah headline omits this concession.
The contrast with the Qurʼān. The dawah claim of perfect Qurʼānic preservation, by classical Sunni admission, is a claim about the Uthmanic recension — the muṣḥaf produced when ʿUthmān ordered competing copies destroyed (see Bukhārī 4986-4987). Behnam Sadeghi's Sanaʿaʾ palimpsest research shows lower-text variants from a pre-Uthmanic period. The seven and ten qirāʼāt traditions preserve substantial textual differences. The popular Muslim claim of perfect preservation is therefore not in tension with Christian textual scholarship; it is in tension with classical Islamic scholarship.
The honest comparative position. Both the New Testament and the Qurʼān are textually well-attested ancient documents whose wording is substantially recoverable. Neither is perfectly preserved in the absolute sense the popular Muslim apologetic claims for the Qurʼān. The Christian comes to dialogue having long since accepted that he holds Scripture in the hands of careful textual scholarship; the Muslim friend is sometimes asked to come the same way.
A note for the Christian reader
This page is for the conversation that has earned it. Most Christian-Muslim conversations should not turn on textual criticism. They should turn on Christ. But for the friend who has been pressing the Misquoting Jesus line — and there are many — knowing the field well enough to walk an example like Mark 1:41 calmly and accurately is what builds trust in everything else you say.
How a thoughtful Muslim apologist responds
Three Muslim apologetic moves and the Christian engagement of each.
"But Ehrman is a New Testament scholar at a major university, and he says the text is unreliable." Ehrman is a critical scholar; his published academic work largely agrees with the consensus that no Christian doctrine is overturned by textual variants. Misquoting Jesus was written for a popular audience and emphasises the number of variants without distinguishing the four categories above. Daniel Wallace's published responses and the Reinventing Jesus coauthored response engage the popular argument directly. The thoughtful Christian friend reads both Ehrman and his responders.
"You can't trust ancient manuscripts because so much time passed." More time passed for every other ancient document. The earliest manuscripts of Caesar's Gallic Wars are from the 9th century — about 950 years after composition. The earliest manuscripts of Plato's dialogues are from the 9th century — about 1,200 years. The New Testament's earliest fragment is c. 125 AD, within thirty years of the autograph; full books appear within 100 years. The honest Muslim apologist has to apply the same standard to every classical document or to none.
"The Christians changed the text to support the divinity of Christ." This is a specific claim Ehrman addresses in The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture (1993). His thesis is that some variants reflect orthodox copyists smoothing the text in the direction of orthodoxy. The honest Christian response is to grant that some such variants exist and note that the early papyri (𝔓46, 𝔓66, 𝔓75) — pre-dating the orthodox Christological controversies — already contain the high Christology of John 1, Philippians 2, and Colossians 1. The text was not invented by Constantine. It was preserved through Constantine.
Sources to read
Click a source title to read it on an authoritative site (quran.com for the Qurʼān and tafsīr; sunnah.com for ḥadīth).
| Source | What it covers |
|---|---|
| John 1:1 | The high Christology already in the earliest papyri. |
| Mark 1:41 | Worked example of a meaningful-and-viable variant. |
| John 7:53-8:11 | The pericope adulterae — likely later interpolation. |
| 1 John 5:7-8 (KJV) | The Comma Johanneum — clearly absent from early Greek manuscripts. |
| Matthew 28:19 | Trinitarian baptismal formula — independent of the Comma. |
| Codex Sinaiticus (online) | The complete fourth-century manuscript, fully digitised and freely viewable. |
| Codex Vaticanus (online) | The Vatican Library's digital surrogate of Codex Vaticanus. |
| INTF Liste (Münster) | The official catalogue of all known Greek New Testament manuscripts. |
| Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM) | Daniel Wallace's NT manuscript imaging project. |
| Editio Critica Maior (Münster) | The current major textual-critical edition project. |
| Bruce Metzger, *The Text of the New Testament* | The standard scholarly handbook (4th ed., with Bart Ehrman). |
| Daniel Wallace, blog and academic publications | Working textual critic; engages popular and academic level. |
How to think about it
- Walk the four categories. Spelling, word order, harmonisation, theological — the 400,000 number is honest but the meaningful-and-viable number is small.
- Name early evidence. P52 c. 125 AD; P46/P66/P75 by c. 175-200 AD; Sinaiticus and Vaticanus c. 300-360 AD. Compare to the rest of the ancient world.
- Cite live worked examples. Mark 1:41, the pericope adulterae, the Comma Johanneum — three different variant types, three different conclusions.
- Be the first to disclose the Comma. The Christian who admits the Comma is not original is more credible than the dawah speaker who attacks it.
- Land on Christ. Textual criticism is not the gospel. It is the careful scholarship that confirms what we already know — that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.
Common objections
- Ehrman says there are 400,000 variants. How can the text be reliable?
Ehrman says exactly that, and he is correct. He also says — in the appendix to the same book and in his interview with Lee Strobel — that essential Christian beliefs are not affected by these variants. The 400,000 number includes every spelling difference and word-order change; the meaningful-and-viable variants number under 1,500 by Daniel Wallace's count, and no Christian doctrine turns on any of them. The headline is honest. The whole picture is different from the headline.
- Why isn't the Comma Johanneum in modern Bibles? Doesn't that prove they removed verses?
Modern Bibles don't include the Comma because the earliest Greek manuscripts don't include it. It first appears in Latin manuscripts from about the 5th century and in only a handful of Greek manuscripts before the 14th. The honest scholarship excluded it once the earlier manuscripts were available. The Trinity does not depend on the Comma — Matthew 28:19, John 1:1, Philippians 2:5-11, and many other clear texts establish it. This is what mature textual criticism looks like: willing to give up a beloved verse for the sake of accuracy, and confident enough in the rest of Scripture not to need it.
- Don't you wish you had the originals?
Of course. So would every classical historian for every ancient document. We have what we have, and what we have is the best-attested ancient text in the world. The honest Christian scholar is grateful for the manuscript record, honest about its limits, and confident in what it does establish: that the text we read in the NA28 critical edition is, to a degree of confidence higher than any other ancient document, what the apostles wrote.
- How does this compare with the Qurʼān?
The Qurʼān we read is the Uthmanic recension — produced when ʿUthmān ordered competing copies burned (Bukhārī 4987). The seven and ten qirāʼāt traditions preserve substantial readings. The Sanaʿaʾ palimpsest's lower text contains pre-Uthmanic variants. By classical Sunni admission, perfect-preservation is not the same kind of claim Christians make about the Bible — it is a claim about a particular post-Muhammad textual codification. The popular Muslim apologetic and the classical Muslim scholarship hold different views.
Related questions
Want to walk through this question source by source? Ask in chat — voice or text — and the assistant will quote every passage in full with clickable citations.