TR vs W-H, N-A/UBS
Fri, 2 Aug 1996 12:57:11 -0700 (PDT)

Jim Fellure writes:
" There appears to be at least two positions. I would assume that John
W. Burgon/S. Franklin Logsdon(NASB) could represent the camp that holds
the TR to be the best critical greek text, while Bruce Metzger/F.F.
Bruce would support the N-A/UBS to be the best. How is a layman to know?"

I don't know how the other listers feel about getting into this very thorny
issue, but let me clear up one thing immediately: the NASB is firmly on the
NA/UBS side. What work Frank Logsdon did for the Lockman Foundation in regard
to the NASB, if he in fact did any, is unclear. Later, due to discussions he
had with David O. Fuller, Logsdon disavowed the NASB. As to the bigger TR
vs. NA issue, both sides have a lot to say (I'm on the NA side) and I don't
know whether this is the best forum, but I'm willing to participate if it is.
There is a textual criticism list where such matters are discussed in depth,
but I don't think that is the place for general discussion about the basic
issue. If you like I could e-mail you info produced by the Lockman Foundation,
but it is of course written from a pro NASB (and hence NA/UBS) perspective.

Don Wilkins
UC Riverside