6679Re: tc-list Burgon on 1Tim 3:16
- Aug 3, 1999Robert B. Waltz wrote:
>Not a *very* significant variant, though! :)
> On 8/1/99, dd-1@... wrote:
> >Robert, Denny Diehl here
> > >Think of it! The Textus Receptus, from which the King James Version
> > >is translated, which contains readings not found in *any* Greek
> > >manuscript.
> > >
> > >All I will say on the subject.
> >If you wouldn't mind saying a little more on the subject, besides
> >the Comma Johannine, would you mind listing those readings
> >which are not found in any Greek manuscript?
> Someone pointed out that Erasmus had no text of the final portion
> of the Apocalypse (though it was only a few verses, not two
> chapters). As a result, there are several readings in there not
> found in any Greek manuscript. (I don't have a full list, but
> you could check Hoskier.)
> In addition, in Phil. 4:3, the TR reads KAI. Metzger reports
> that this reading is supported only by 462, but according to
> Davies, 462 reads NAI along with all other witnesses.
Besides, the evidence is not *clear* at this point!
>"Copies of the TR"? What is the evidence for that statement?
> There may be others; I don't know. Hard to tell, given the lack
> of complete collations. :-)
> Technically, the Comma *is* found in Greek manuscripts. It's just
> that the manuscripts (with the exception of 629 and others which
> have it from the Latin) are generally copies of the TR.
> And since you've gotten me talking anyway, I should make a point
> here. Helge Evenson makes the argument that the issue is the number
> of witnesses. Jim West or Philip Wesley Comfort would argue for
> Neither one matters. If majority rule meant anything, the world
> would be flat and we'd all be pantheists (since, when the human
> race evolved, people held both opinions :-).
> Age doesn't mean anything either.
>Or maybe the autograph text is found in a *mixture* of two or more
> What matters is that the majority of manuscripts disagree with
> the earliest manuscripts. Therefore at least one group must be
> wrong (they may, be it noted, *both* be wrong, but no more than
> one group can be right).
"groups"? ALL MSS are "mixed" more or less!
>At least, MSS were altered for "dogmatic" reasons!
> The tendency is to decide this matter "politically" -- as if
> manuscripts were people lined up at a polling place. (Not that
> that means much; generally speaking, the unwashed mass of
> voters are fools. Consider that, in America, they voted for BOTH
> Reagan AND Clinton :-).
> It's not a political matter. It's not a dogmatic manner, either.
> One must, by some *external*, non-political, non-dogmatic meansThe Byz/TR consists of readings found in BOTH old and later MSS!
> decide between the old manuscripts and the majority of manuscripts.
>I would rather say: The matter must be decided based on comparison of
> Most textual critics use "internal evidence," and on this basis
> prefer the text of the older manuscripts. This is *not* universal;
> Maurice Robinson prefers the majority text based on this sort of
> reasoning. And, frankly, I have more respect for Robinson (even
> though his text differs greatly from mine) than I have for
> Comfort -- whose text more nearly agrees with mine, but for the
> wrong reasons.
> But I stress: The matter must be decided based on comparison of
> the text-types,
*MSS*! (Even though I do not personally follow that line of thought in my
own decision of which text to follow! But, at least, I can play around
with textual criticism, if for no other reason than plain FUN!) :)
> not comparison of the number, age, or otherBob, even though I do not agree with you on what text to follow, I
> arbitrary fact about their witnesses. (Surely you wouldn't
> pick a New Testament text based on the colour of the parchment,
> would you? Yet that is as valid a basis for discrimination as
> the others, since it just as completely ignores the text.)
> I hope that makes sense. This is more time than I was supposed
> to spend on this subject today. :-)
appreciate all your comments! You are an interesting TC'er.
- Mr. Helge Evensen
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>