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

4674Re: [textualcriticism] Variants again, can you tell I'm frustrated

Expand Messages
  • Daniel
    Apr 13, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Mishoe <edmishoe@...> wrote:
      >Or, speaking of frustation, read this quote - with Dr. Wallace's comment on singular readings - in mind: This is a quote from E. J. Epp, THE ECLECTIC METHOD IN NEW TESTAMENT TEXTUAL CRITICISM:  SOLUTION OR SYMPTOM? p. 244

      Hence, readings that obviously are (1) nonsense readings, (2) clear and demonstrable scribal errors, (3) mere orthographic variations, and (4) "singular readings" will be assumed to have been excluded from the process, for they are not "textual variants" in the proper, restricted sense of that term* and, therefore, do not constitute appropriate raw material of the most likely original NT text.<

      This is interesting, because in "Junia: The First Female Apostle," Epp writes:

      "There are perhaps a third of a million variant readings among the [5,600] extant manuscripts of this rather small collection of writings we call the New Testament."

      Daniel Buck
    • Show all 23 messages in this topic