Subject: tc-list Jesus is better.

From: "robert s. morse" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 15:01:25 -0600

Dear tc-list correspondents:

My thanks for all the valuable information you have made available.

I especially appreciated Mr. Robert B. Waltz's contribution of 1 Jul
1999. In explaining why critical editions of the NT have placed double
brackets about certain passages, he notes--very significantly--that the
passages "tend to make Jesus what we consider a better person...." No
doubt. This being so, the passages would seem to share in the work of
the Holy Spirit, of whom the Lord said, "...he will glorify me...." (Jn.
16:14). Since evidence of inspiration is further evidence of canonicity,
we have an extra reason for regarding the passages as canonical--the
word of God, and not forgeries. Thank you, Mr. Waltz.

Bob Morse

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 19:18:22 -0500

>word of God, and not forgeries. Thank you, Mr. Waltz.

Since I am being -- er -- invoked here, I must sound a very strong
note of protest.

Textual criticism is NOT a matter of faith. I can't stop you from
determining the text of a faith basis, but if you do so, you are
ignoring all principles of science and of textual criticism.

Moreover, once you start down the path of preferring the reading
you personally like, as opposed to the reading more likely to be
original, where do you stop? By this principle, every critic would
be free to adopt ANY reading. It wouldn't even have to be found
in a manuscript; if it's "right," you can adopt it anyway. Under
this method of criticism, the Bible, instead of being made a
greater and more holy document, is cheapened, because it is simply
the text you happen to prefer. It's your entirely human text.

A textual critic -- indeed, any Christian who reveres the Bible --
must have a method, and stick to it, even if the results seem
unfortunate.

I am probably the most extreme proponent of this view; I am constantly
pleading for more scientific criticism.  But surely it is obvious
to all that this method of criticism is both unacceptable and
completely hopeless.

So, for example, while I consider the Woman Taken in Adultery to be
the most beautiful of the legends about Jesus, it is just that: A
legend, a product of the "Western" text, not generally adopted until
about the tenth century. The case against the other passages in
double brackets is similar, though generally not as strong.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)