Subject: Re: Roman's Doxology

From: "Dale M. Wheeler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 09:23:00 -0700

On Tue, 15 Apr 1997, Jim West wrote:

> > I would suggest that the Romans situation demonstrates
> >that not only can the earliest MS (P46) be quite wrong, but also the
> >Alexandrian, Western and Caesarean (?) traditions, and also that a similar
> >conclusion can be drawn in regard to the pericope adultera. 
> >
> 
> I dont see it that way.  In fact, what the Romans example illustrates is
> that early scribes were more likely to leave things the way they found them
> than later scribes.

Jim:

I'm curious, based on what you said, as to how you would respond to (not
necessarily related exclusively to the Rom question): 

(1) the idea held by many TC'ers that virtually all the changes in the text
took place before about the third/forth century (I realize the
"growth-theory"'ers don't hold this anymore, but rather seem to see the
process as ongoing...I get the impression that you think the same
thing...but how do you argue against the other position ?)?

(2) the work of Colwell, Zuntz, and Aland's "Wild texts" in characterizing
the early papyri scribes as copyists who made accidental errors mainly of
ommission rather than being "editors" of the texts who added, clarified,
harmonized, etc.

It seems to me (a TC agnostic !) that 1 and 2 taken together partially
underlie (though rarely if ever made explicit) the Byzantine priority
position...I'm sure if I'm wrong here Maurice will tell me, but at least
that has been my impression.

Also, given your preference for the earliest reading, what's your reaction
to the work of Comfort ??

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

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:23:27 -0400 (EDT)

> that has been my impression.

Since I got brought into this particular point of discussion
(unwillingly), I will simply reply that I don't see (1) or (2) as
"underlying" the Byzantine-priority position, though I would agree with
Colwell that virtually all sensible readings probably were created by AD
200.  I do not see the early papyrus scribes as merely blunderers,
however, since even Colwell's study did tend to show some stylistic
"editorial" activity on the part of those scribes.

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~