Sat Aug 17 17:02:36 1996

From owner-tc-list  Sat Aug 17 17:02:36 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA03813; Sat, 17 Aug 1996 17:01:33 -0400
X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 15:30:15 -0700
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: "Robert B. Waltz" 
Subject: Re: Announcing "The Encyclopedia of New Testament Textual Criti
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1582

On Sat, 17 Aug 1996, nichael@sover.net (Nichael Lynn Cramer) wrote:

[ ... ]
>
>Which is precisely why I mentioned the Metzger, Aland, Ehrman & Holmes and
>Fee & Epp volumes in my original query.  I.e. they are readily available,
>excellent texts that do exactly that.

I can't agree with this. I have *nine* introductions to textual criticism
(Westcott & Hort, Metzger, Aland, Greenlee, Hammond, Vaganay/Amphoux,
Black, Lake, Kenyon), and even combined they don't make up a complete
introduction. Aland gives a lot of useful information about manuscripts,
but is very brief when it comes to the *practice* of textual criticism.
Metzger gives more examples, but his textual theory is really little
more than an update of Westcott & Hort.

I have a lot of respect for Epp; he has a clearer vision of what needs
to be done than anyone else I know of. But nobody is *responding* to
his vision.

As for Ehrman & Holmes, I agree, it is the best available summary of
the state of the art. But there are a lot of holes. I can't blame them
for leaving me out; I'm nobody. But what about the essay on the
Majority Text debate? It completely leaves out Maurice Robinson,
who is the only supporter of the Majority Text whose opinions I value.
Ehrman and Holmes show the state of mainstream textual criticism.
But mainstream criticism, as Epp pointed out, has hardly advanced
at all since Hort's day. What we need is to look at the crackpot
theories. Most of them will prove to be worthless -- but chances
are that the next big advance is in there. Somewhere.

Bob Waltz
waltzmn@skypoint.com

Back