that these texts represent.^47 Instead, competing literary editions, comprised of a literary
unit, whether a book, story, narrative, pericope, etc., were transmitted by authors or re-
dactors, and which “a subsequent redactor or editor intentionally changed to a sufficient
extent that the resultant form should be called a revised edition of that text.”^48 According
to this view the scriptures in general did not become fixed in their final (proto-)MT form
as a result of predictable internal or external processes, but rather were abruptly frozen
due to the dual threats presented by the Roman conquest on the one hand, and the rise of
gentile Christianity which undermined the Jewish character of the scriptures on the
other.^49
The Categorisation of Variant Readings
Critical to this analysis is the ability to delineate between errors and genuine variants.
Here, again, certain tools developed by biblical text critics should be reviewed and em-
ployed where appropriate. We will also survey the various text critical systems available
for weighing variants once they have been classed as such.
Errors
All variant readings are, on the face of it, to be treated as ‘alternative’ readings. Essen-
tially, we must do our best to ensure the equal standing of all attested text-types, without
(^47) E. Ulrich, "The Bible in the Making: The Scriptures at Qumran," (^) The Community of the Renewed Cove-
nant: The Notre Dame Symposium on the Dead Sea Scrolls (eds E. Ulrich and J.C. Vanderkam; Indiana:
University of Notre Dame Press, 1994) 79-80. 48
49 E. Ulrich, "The Canonical Process," 278.
E. Ulrich, "The Qumran Biblical Scrolls," 87.