Fri Feb 16 18:10:26 1996

From majordom  Fri Feb 16 18:10:26 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA26332; Fri, 16 Feb 1996 18:10:26 +0500
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 18:07:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: Carlton Winbery 
Cc: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: "Majority Text"
In-Reply-To: 
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 2267
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu



On Mon, 12 Feb 1996, Carlton Winbery wrote:

> >Quoting Maurice Robinson:

> >It is true that most if not all advocates of the true "Majority Text" or
> >"Byzantine-priority" hypotheses reflect a
> >theological conservatism, including a belief in biblical inerrancy.  This
> >position does not, however, dictate our choice of variant readings, nor
> >does it imply any desire to make the resultant text match the TR or KJV
> >or any other translation.

> >I have presented a number of papers to the Evangelical Theological Society
> >on aspects of Byzantine priority, and have not made any conclusions which
> >were imposed by inerrantist or "preservationist" beliefs 

> You have clearly differentiated your position here from that of Hodges and
> Farstad.  Your statement about biblical inerrancy is interesting.  I do not
> wish to open that can of worms again on this list or b-greek, but I suspect
> that it plays a greater role than you allow, but I must read your work and
> examine your textual decisions before I make such assertions.  

Interestingly, my views regarding inerrancy developed about two years
AFTER my text-critical position had swung from electic to Byzantine-
priority.  I would not want to suggest cause or effect in either direction.

I do think that if you should read my ETS papers on text-critical issues, 
the word "inerrancy" will not come up except to criticize some others 
within the "majority text" and KJV-Only camp who have a theological 
agenda which supersedes their text-critical views.

> I had hoped
> that when I finished Hodges/Farstad that I could settle back into my easy
> eclectism and be happy with my new "Textus Receptus" (UBS-N-A) and just
> read the NT.

You can, and you still won't be far off from the Byzantine/Majority 
Textform in any case, since the agreement runs 90%+ throughout. *:-)


=========================================================================
                       Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.
            Associate Professor of Greek and New Testament
              Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
                      Wake Forest, North Carolina
                   
=========================================================================

Back