Tue Mar 19 15:42:31 1996

From majordom  Tue Mar 19 15:42:31 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA23916; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:42:31 +0500
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:39:45 -0500
From: Orthopodeo@aol.com
Message-Id: <960319153945_355979169@mail02.mail.aol.com>
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: James 2:18
Content-Length: 2627
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a message dated 96-03-15 19:10:19 EST, D. Wheeler wrote:

> The real problem for
>TC, as I see it, is that passages like this, linked together in a chain,
>form the basis for the characterizations of what Byzantine scribes must have
>done, and then subsequent decisions are based on those generalizations.
>Many more studies, like what Colwell did for the papyrii, are needed on the
>Byz material, so that we can formulate an accurate, rather than anecdotal
>picture of the Byz scribal process...I would suggest that the newest studies
>are not all that flattering to the anecdotal picture.

It was most fascinating (and for me, rather frustrating) to see this post
twice in my mailbox.  No, not because of a system problem, but because one of
the subscribers here copied it over to the most vitriolic of KJV Only,
Ruckmanite mailing lists (i.e., the Peter Ruckman, Gail Riplinger, "all
scholars are together in a grand conspiracy to get the KJV" style folks) as
an illustration of the "subjectivity" of textual criticism.  In fact, the
person who forwarded it added at the beginning, " As Dr. Wheeler points out,
such phony scholarship needs to be debunked in the same way that Hort's
"Lucian Recension" was debunked by Burgon." Something tells me Dr. Wheeler
was not trying to say that we cannot make progress and hence should simply
grab the TR and be done with it (those who demand absolute certainty in all
things think we need to go that direction), but that further study is
*always* to be advised.  Nor did I see anything in his post about "phony
scholarship" (a term used by KJV Only advocates to describe, well, everyone
who doesn't agree with them).  I doubt if even one person on that other list
would take it the way it was originally intended, however, and I would not be
surprised at all to see this post quoted again and again in the context,
"See, scholars admit that they are just picking and choosing among variants
just to get away from God's Holy Word, the AV 1611!"  The only moral to this
story I can draw is, it doesn't matter what you say or how you say it,
somebody can, and most probably will, twist it to suit their needs.

**********************************************************
*   James White, B.A., M.A., Th.M., Orthopodeo@aol.com   *
*  College of Christian Studies-Grand Canyon University  *
*   Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary-AZ Campus   *
* Professor of Apologetics-Faraston Theological Seminary *
*          Director, Alpha and Omega Ministries          *
*           http://net387.texas.net/ao.html              *
**********************************************************

Back