Wed Dec 6 12:47:24 1995

From majordom  Wed Dec  6 12:47:24 1995
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA15442; Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:47:24 +0500
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 1995 12:45:00 -0500
From: Timster132@aol.com
Message-Id: <951206124459_46364269@emout04.mail.aol.com>
To: mrobinsn@mercury.interpath.com, dalemw@teleport.com
Cc: TC-LIST@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: Collation against MT vs. TR
Content-Length: 1277
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk

In a message dated 95-12-05 mrobinsn@mercury.interpath.com
 (Elston Gunn) writes:

> Pickering's
>rationale for this strange situation is not stemmatics like H/F, but
>merely his conclusion that the Byzantine reading as it stands does not 
>square with his concepts of biblical inerrancy, and thus "must" be wrong, 
>even though most scribes went for it.....If "majority text" theory keeps 
>heading for minority text readings, whether stemmatically-based or on the 
>basis of the theological whims of the critic, I fail to see how any 
>meaningful "majority text theory" can remain.

  Isn't that the point?  H&F believe in an omnipotent God who has
providentially
preserved the text and that conviction has led them to try proving the
"Majority
text" position with their stemma, etc.   Likewise, Pickering's belief of
inerrancy leads him to pick and chose a text that supports his beliefs.

  Maurice Robinson stands out from the crowd, in that his devotion to the
Byzantine text family is based squarely on his interpretation of textual
transmission.  He and I don't see eye to eye on textual transmission, but I
appreciate his approach much more than that of H/F.

   BTW, is anyone on the list proficient at reading Greek miniscule cursive?

Tim Staker
Timster132@aol.com

Back