Re: [textualcriticism] Byz versus D in Clement's Text of Matthew

Expand Messages
• There is a principle in statistics that when the difference is greater than any possible error in the data, the conclusions stand regardless of the paucity of
Message 1 of 2 , Dec 20, 2011
There is a principle in statistics that when the difference is greater than any possible error in the data, the conclusions stand regardless of the paucity of the data.

Generally, any time the data show 66% on one side and 33% on the other, unless the data was cherry-picked to provide one conclusion or another,  the data, however little, is greater than the possible error, and the majority wins.

This is one reason why pollsters can survey 561 people and come to the accurate conclusion that over 150 Million Americans don't approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as President.

Here a Swedish scientist applies this principle to UN population figures:

Daniel Buck

From: james_snapp_jr <voxverax@...>
To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 2:45 AM
Subject: [textualcriticism] Byz versus D in Clement's Text of Matthew

Previously, a review of the data in Carl P. Cosaert's book "The Text of the Gospels in Clement of Alexandria" showed that out of the 51 places where Clement supports either Aleph or TR (but not both), Clement agrees 15 times (29%) with Aleph, and 36 times (71%) with TR. . . .
Anybody notice anything strange about this list? From the beginning of Matthew up to 22:40, Clement very heavily favors TR over D. Then, from 23:9 to the end of the book, Clement very heavily favors D over TR.
. . .
So: out of 68 places in Matthew where Clement agrees with either D or with TR, Clement agrees with D against TR 21 times (31%), and Clement agrees with TR against D 47 times (69%).

Clement's text of Matthew is twice as Byzantine as it is Western. (This would be the case even if five of the Clem+TR agreements were subtracted from the list.)

But notice that shift at the beginning of chapter 23!! This data seems consistent with the idea that Clement used a block-mixed copy of Matthew -- Byzantine from 1:1 to 23:1, and Western from 23:1 onward. (If this does not suggest such a scenario, /what would?/)
. . .
Before wrapping up by seeing how many of Clement's agreements with D are adopted in NA27, let's notice that while Clement supports an Alexandrian reading against TR 12 times, he agrees with D against Byz and Alex 18 times. Thus, even though virtually all of Clement's Western readings occur after 23:1, /his text of Matthew still has more distinctly Western readings than it has distinctly Alexandrian readings./

Would you like to know how many of those 18 readings in which Clement and D agree against TR (without also agreeing with B) were adopted into the text of NA27? There is just one such reading: at 23:26, Clement and D do not have KAI THS PAROPSIDOS. I think NA27 is incorrect at this point (and so, it seems, does Michael Holmes, who included KAI THS PAROPSIDOS in the text of the SBL GNT). Let's momentarily assume that the text of NA27 is correct. This would mean that when Clement disagrees with the TR so as to agree with a Western reading that does not agree with the Alexandrian Text -- something he does 18 times -- he thus adopts a correct reading exactly once. In seventeen out of 18 cases where Clement's text disagrees with the TR in favor of D, the result is that Clement adopts a corruption. . . .

Well, that's enough for today. Here are the stats one more time:

Out of 68 places in Matthew where Clement agrees with either D or with TR, Clement agrees with D against TR 21 times (31%), and Clement agrees with TR against D 47 times (69%). Of those 21 agreements with D, three of them are also agreements with B. Of the remaining 18 agreements of Clement and D against TR, only one of them (at 23:26) is adopted as the text in NA27. And, Clement tends to strongly agree with TR against D until the beginning of chapter 23, from which point he tends to strongly agree with D against TR.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

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