Subject: Re: Qualifications, Classifications, and Progress

From: "Perry L. Stepp" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 02:41:56 -0500

Regarding progress:

The points raised by Dr. Ehrman all center on what *I* would suggest is the
central ongoing methodological advancement, namely the realization that
textual criticism based on generalities leads us nowhere.  

For example: text-critical questions have historically been addressed via
the use of a system of canons of internal criteria, e.g., "The shorter
reading is preferred."  But detailed studies of individual manuscripts
(undertaken via a more or less standardized approach, i.e., *some* type of
thorough collation of the mss against one another rather than against a
single standard) and of the individual scribes and correctors of mss (e.g.,
Colwell, Fee, Royse, Kubo, et. al.) have shown how inaccurate and
insufficient the traditionally stated canons are.  

To follow the example of "the cult of the shorter reading":  detailed
studies of scribes show that some scribes tend to "skip" more material than
others, and--at least when *short* vl are in view, scribes tended to omit
rather than add material--haplography seems to have occurred more than
dittography, etc.  

Detailed studies of readings, on the other hand, show that in the case of
*some* types of longer readings, such as conflations, the shorter reading
is indeed to be preferred.

I guess what I'm suggesting is that the work that is being done today is
minutely detailed and labyrinthine (this from a man who knows
labyrinthine--see the second paragraph of this post!), and the scholarly
community may take years to really digest the data, but the results should
be revolutionary.

Grace and peace, 

PLStepp

************************************************************
Pastor, DeSoto Christian Church, DeSoto TX
Ph.D. candidate in New Testament, Baylor University

"A system of morality which is based on relative 
emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar
conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing
true."
                    Phaedo 69b
************************************************************