Thu Jan 2 23:59:49 1997

From owner-tc-list  Thu Jan  2 23:59:49 1997
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id XAA02675; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 23:58:52 -0500
Date: 02 Jan 97 23:54:19 EST
From: Mike  Arcieri <102147.2045@CompuServe.COM>
To: TC-LIST 
Subject: Maj text trans
Message-ID: <970103045418_102147.2045_EHT90-1@CompuServe.COM>
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1751

>The folks at the Majority Text Society are translating now, but I do not know
what will become >of it.

Actually, Arthur Farstad put out the Gospel of John called "Living Water  The
Gospel of John - Logos 21 Version" meaning the Word (Logos) of God for the 21st
century. This is a contemporary trans straight out of the Hodges-Farstad text.
You can visit the Living Water WWW at http://www.livingwater.org

> ** Scrivener tried to "reconstruct" as best as he may what most likely was the
> Greek text which lay before the 1611 translators. The resultant composite
Greek
> text agrees primarily with Beza, then with Stephanus (with some exceptions -
see
> Heb 10:23 "faith" vs "hope")....

>He also missed at Acts 19:20  Lord vs God.

Actually he didn't "miss" it. In his book "The Authorized edition of the English
Bible" (p. 247) he leaves "faith" in the text as it was "a mere oversite of our
translators". Re. Acts 19:20 Scrivener claims that the 1611 translators followed
the Vulgate rather than the Greek (Ibid., p. 263).


> ** The TR was a "rough and ready" tool used as a ref. to the Byz text, but
since
> the H/F text and the Robinson/Pierpont GNT have been published the TR is only
> useful for collation purposes (no critical value).

>The Maj Text should be used by the IGNTP and all other collators.  This 
>would save a lot of work because more mss agree with that than any TR.  I 
>told them, but they said don't call us, we'll call you  :)

True, but using the Majtxt as a new collating base (as Wallace argued in an
article in Bib Sac) would render all previously published collations obsolete.
Besides Hodges and Farstad may very well change the text in the future (fat
chance but you never know) and then what do you do?

Mike A.

Back