Subject: Re: Codices for Teaching

From: [email-masked] (Dale M. Wheeler)
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 10:18:09 -0800

Several people have emailed me personally about the book mentioned at the
Brown site; here is what they say at the end of the text-type discussion:

This material is based on R. C. Briggs, Interpreting the New Testament
Today: An Introduction to Methods and Issues in the Study of the New
Testament, (Nashville:Abingdon, 1982), pp. 45-47). 

I've also had several ask who I think "did it," if Lucian didn't.  I
personally don't think anyone "did it," but I thought it would be
interesting to see what those whose expertise is TC thought about whether
Lucian did it or not, and why (please give data, if possible).  Anyone want
to respond ??

***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept                  Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street                               Portland, OR  97220
Voice: 503-251-6416    FAX:503-254-1268     E-Mail: [email-masked] 
***********************************************************************

---

From: Bart Ehrman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 13:52:54 -0500 (EST)

> Lucian did it or not, and why (please give data, if possible).  Anyone want

   Um, sorry, but I haven't been following all of these postings.  "Did" 
*what*?

-- Bart D. Ehrman, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 15:08:09 -0500 (EST)

> Lucian did it or not, and why (please give data, if possible).  Anyone want

I would here agree with Dale, i.e., that no one "did it."  Of course I do
not view the Byzantine Textform as the product of a recension or even of a
"process" method such as Colwell proposed. 

But even if Hort and others were correct that a "Syrian recension" had
occurred, Lucian would probably be the least likely person to have been
involved in such, since he died ca.314, and condemnation rather than
acceptance was made regarding the "codices which Lucian falsified" (which
from all indications were of the OT LXX and not the NT at all). 

I would suggest (contra Fee) that a better case can be made for the
Alexandrian text as the product of second-century recensional activity
than for the Byzantine; but even in that case Lucian would have had
nothing to do with any NT recension, and the archetype Alexandrian text 
likely would antedate Lucian in any case.

=========================================================================
                       Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.
            Associate Professor of Greek and New Testament
              Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
                      Wake Forest, North Carolina
                   <[email-masked]>
=========================================================================