Fri Apr 26 23:36:08 1996

From majordom  Fri Apr 26 23:36:08 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA28948; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 23:36:08 +0500
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 23:01:14 -0400
From: HuldrychZ@aol.com
Message-Id: <960426230113_101368094@emout18.mail.aol.com>
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Eclectic Method
Content-Length: 713
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu

Friends,

It is well known that Hebrew Bible text criticism takes as its starting point
the MT (as preserved in Codex Leningrad).  Variants are assembled and
evaluated in comparison to this text.
Why, then, is NT text criticism based on a method that is apparently somewhat
scattered and piecemeal?  There does not appear to be one NT text upon which
comparison of variants is based.  Would TC not be easier if text critics at
least agreed that Sinaiticus (for instance) were the base text and then
variants could be placed in the margin (as is the case in BHS for the Hebrew
Bible)?  Then these variants could be evaluated for what they were worth.

Seeking to know in the wilderness of E. Tennessee,


Jim West

Back