Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Collation against MT vs. TR

Expand Messages
  • Dale M. Wheeler
    ... providentially ... Majority ... I m not trying to defend H&F or their theory here, but this again is another misconception about their view. There are
    Message 1 of 1714 , Dec 6, 1995
    • 0 Attachment
      > Isn't that the point? H&F believe in an omnipotent God who has
      providentially
      >preserved the text and that conviction has led them to try proving the
      "Majority
      >text" position with their stemma, etc.

      I'm not trying to defend H&F or their theory here, but this again is another
      misconception about their view. There are those who start from providential
      preservation of the text, but H&F do not. The real issue in interacting
      with their work is whether they are correctly using stemmatics and whether
      their stemmatic reconstructions are valid, nothing more and nothing less.
      At the heart of Hodges' criticism of the way "stemmatics" is done nowadays
      in NT TC is that the maxim used is "community of agreement implies community
      of origin." But normally the maxim is "community of error implies community
      of origin." The latter is more difficult for most of us to track since the
      "blemishes" of the papyrii and uncials are not readily visible in the NA
      footnotes (even less so in UBS). I note as an aside that this is a standard
      argument presented by Eclectics, Equal Prioritists (Sturz), and Byz
      prioritists against current textual theory and practice, based on the
      observations of Zuntz, Colwell, etc. Whether it is a valid concern is again
      difficult to tell since (electronic ??) copies of the earliest texts are
      still not easily available for side by side comparisons at each point of the
      text to see the nature of their errors.

      >Likewise, Pickering's belief of
      >inerrancy leads him to pick and chose a text that supports his beliefs.

      I'm not sure that Pickering should be lumped in with H&F anymore either. He
      has, as far as I can tell, rejected the stemmatic argument. I was under the
      impression that he had moved closer to Maurice's position...but maybe not.
      At any rate, while I think that he would still agree (??) with H&F on much
      philosophically, I don't think his conclusions can be used to define or
      understand their position. I must admit that I'm not totally current on all
      the moving around, but I think this is fairly accurate. Maurice, I'm sure,
      would know.



      ***********************************************************************
      Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
      Chair, Biblical Languages Dept Multnomah Bible College
      8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
      Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@...
      ***********************************************************************
    • Julian Goldberg
      The complete Hebrew Scriptures (Hebrew Bible) or TANAKH (Torah-Law, Neviim-Prophets, Ketuvim-Writings) based on the Masoretic Hebrew text with vowels and
      Message 1714 of 1714 , Feb 4, 1997
      • 0 Attachment
        The complete Hebrew Scriptures (Hebrew Bible) or TANAKH (Torah-Law,
        Neviim-Prophets, Ketuvim-Writings) based on the Masoretic Hebrew text
        with vowels and cantillation marks in one complete compact black hard
        covered volume which measures 12 cm x 19 cm with over 1360 pages that
        have been arranged according to traditional chapter and verse divisions
        along with larger Hebrew letter printing and thicker paper pages for a
        volume of this size. Each book is $ 20.00 (U.S.) postpaid ($ 15.50 for
        the book plus $ 4.50 for postage) and can be ordered directly from:

        Julian Goldberg, 260 Adelaide St., E., # 215, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
        M5A 1N0.

        Thanks.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.