6683Re: tc-list Burgon on 1Tim 3:16
- Aug 3, 1999Mr. Helge Evensen wrote:
> Robert B. Waltz wrote:I would be greatful to see evidence not rhetorics, i.e. P66 has nothing to do
> > I'm not going to get into a long discussion here, but I have to add one
> > comment:
> > On 8/1/99, Mr. Helge Evensen wrote, in part:
> > >Think of it! 98% of the Greek MSS!!! That *is* strong evidence!
> > Think of it! 0% of manuscripts from before the fifth century!
> > An amazing panoply of non-evidence.
> OK, then, let's shift evidence and look at patristic and versional
> evidence. :-)
> Besides, Byz/TR *readings* are found in P66. In fact, almost all of the
> Byz readings in that MS is *also* TR-readings! Think of it! :-)
with the Pastoral Epistles. Moreover, where is the specific patristic and/or
versional evidence for 1 Tim 3,16 that you are invoking?
> >Scholars usually don't *trust* in "multitudes of 'singular' readings". Moreover,
> > Think of it! The Textus Receptus, from which the King James Version
> > is translated, which contains readings not found in *any* Greek
> > manuscript.
> Yeah, think of that! And do not forget all of the ancient MSS which
> scholars *trust* in, which contain multitudes of "singular" readings!
> (Is my TC-memory failing me, or is "singular reading" an expression used
> to indicate a reading not found in *any* (other) Greek
> manuscript?) The TR is nothing more than a complete NT MSS in PRINTED
viewing the TR as just another NT Ms means:
a) it certainly doesn't represent the majority of witnesses at every single
place of variation;
b) it contains errors as every single NT Ms I know of does;
b) if "error free" is required, as people defending the TR sometimes claim, the
TR is way beyond *real* Mss' human proportions.
Dr. Ulrich Schmid
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>