Wed Feb 14 16:29:23 1996

From majordom  Wed Feb 14 16:29:23 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA16735; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 16:29:23 +0500
From: dwashbur@nyx.net (David Washburn)
Message-Id: <9602142126.AA04990@nyx.net>
Subject: Re: "Majority Text"
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 14:26:26 -0700 (MST)
In-Reply-To:  from "Maurice Robinson" at Feb 12, 96 04:23:24 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1260      
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu

Maurice Robinson wrote: 
[snip]
> And I definitely believe you.  Of course, unless a second-century MS of
> unquestioned Byzantine character should be discovered in the sands of
> Egypt (which I hardly think possible), I do not doubt that the "majority
> text" or Byzantine-priority hypothesis will ever see much play in the
> SBL.  Were such an discovery ever to occur, I would be quite interested in 
> seeing the scurrying which would transpire to preserve the current eclectic 
> method (I can hear it now: "just because the Byzantine text is now seen 
> to be quite early does not make it authentic"). *:-)

Actually, as I recall, this is almost exactly what Harry Sturz concluded 
after he showed that Byzantine readings were present in early papyri.  He 
wasn't trying to argue that the Byzantine text should be primary, merely 
put on an equal footing with other text-types for the application of 
internal criteria.  That being the case, I doubt that such a discovery 
would put much of a dent in eclectic methodology, because virtually all 
internal criteria of the eclectic method leave Byzantine readings lacking 
anyway.

-- 
Dave
			http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur/home.html
Seen in a classified ad: "Parachute for sale.  Used once.  Never opened."

Back