Re: [Synoptic-L] Osbourne in Rethinking
- In a message dated 1/31/2003 7:41:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, jefferyhodges@... writes:
Anyway, I'm not disputing that one should prefer as
earliest the text from which the other texts are
You still state this rule in a way that makes it sound virtually tautological. As a text critical principle the third rule, like the others, assumes that absolute certainty in text-critical matters is rarely, if ever, achievable. We cannot always (or perhaps ever) determine the text from which others are derived. Otherwise we would by definition, or immediate implication, have indeed found with certainty what text criticism is after. The principle states rather that that reading is to be preferred which can most easily be taken to be the ultimate source of all the others. There remains some subjectivity in evaluating the evidence applying this rule, and the conclusions of text criticism thus remain less than absolutely certain in the vast majority of cases. The rule must also be used in conjunction with the others, and this can limit the value of a judgment based on it alone. For example, if a reading that seems best able to explain the origin of all the others occurs only in one late manuscript it would not necessarily be reasonable to reject a totality of convergent earlier witnesses in its favor.
- In a message dated 3/11/2003 8:27:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, jlupia2@... writes:
Oui, Larry, vous êtes certainement correct.
Cela veut dire: vous avez certainement raison!