[B-Greek] Very interesting GNT, _A Readers Greek New Testamen t_
bgreek at ntresources.com
bgreek at ntresources.com
Thu Apr 29 08:29:50 EDT 2004
Come on Don, let's not over-state the issues.
Is any level of Greek invalid that doesn't do textual criticism? Of course
that's a very important matter--one which I dearly wish more people would
study and *do.* I own, as you probably do also, not only UBS texts (eds. 1,
2, 3, & 4), but NA (21, 23, 25, 26, 27), Swanson, IGNTP, Tischendorf, W&H,
Souter, H&F, several TRs, and even some of the Bodmer and repros of aleph
and B. But I, at least, teach in a seminary training pastors. Text. crit. is
an elective course for which I'm delighted this semester to have 10
students. (I'd require it of all our students if I had a choice.) Does that
mean that our other students can do nothing of value with a Greek NT? Sure,
they get bits and pieces of text. crit. along the way in our other required
Greek courses, but I'd venture to guess that *most* seminary grads in most
seminaries don't know enough to handle the textual apparatus in UBS, let
alone NA. Should they? Of course. Does it mean their Greek is useless? No.
I'd even venture to guess that *most* people who have learned Greek and are
in ministry of some sort where one might expect them to deal with the text
on a regular basis don't know enough about text. crit. to make any
*legitimate* use of the UBS apparatus other than to notice that there are
variants. I'm very glad that there are some who do know what to do with it.
I don't say this to denigrate text. crit. and certainly not to condone such
a lack. I do everything I can to increase the number of people who can
decipher and use the apparatus. But I will not write off those who can't.
But if most can't or don't use the apparatus (and I'd be thrilled if I were
wrong in that judgment!), then I'm not sure that a testament with a critical
apparatus should be deemed the only acceptable text. (As a summum bonum?
Sure.)
Most will accept the "standard text" (as Kurt Aland liked to call it; the
"new TR" as other less enthusiastic users have been known to say! :) and
work with it "as is." Whether that's good or bad might be debatable. But at
that point, so long as we have a modern critical text, the differences are
not all that great. Unless we insist that *only* the UBS4/NA27 text is
valid, then there are a collection of texts that have so few differences
that they should all be judged acceptable (even though we grant none the
status of perfection). At that point, the differences between RGNT and, say,
NA27 are minuscule--far fewer than between NA25 and NA26/27. (See the 3d
appendix in NA27: 20+ densely packed pages of differences between a half
dozen modern critical texts, or appendix 2 in NA26 with also 20+ pgs. of
differences between NA26 and NA25 & Tischendorf.) At that point, we either
say that all earlier editions of UBS & NA are invalid, or I think we're
forced to acknowledge that RGNT, with something like 200 variants, is
essentially an equivalent text.
Would I tell students that a RGNT is all they will ever need? No, but I
never assume that they will only ever own one Greek testament. They may
think that my collection is overkill (and it might be for the average
pastor). They ought to have at least a UBS text in their study, but for
"carrying purposes" or to keep by their reading chair at home, a RGNT might
serve a very useful function. For a first introduction to such a book (i.e.,
the first few semesters of Greek), I also think that something like the RGNT
is useful. I'd much rather they had a RGNT than an interlinear! (or some
electronic equivalent of such a pony). For many of those who don't use a
Greek NT on a "professional" level (by which I mean those in ministry or the
classroom), and who have never had the opportunity to learn text. crit.,
then they will more likely have just one Greek testament--but in that
situation, the RGNT is certainly adequate, at least IMHO.
Can anyone learn Greek? Perhaps, but it might depend on one's ministry
context as to how realistic a dream that is. If you move in an academic
environment or in well-educated, middle/upper class circles, that sounds
feasible. But that's not where most of the world is. As one example, I spend
much of my weekends working with a new church plant project--in an inner
city context. I can't assume that the people to whom our team ministers can
even read (whether English or another language). What would it accomplish
for me to carry a Greek testament as my Bible in that context? (I do carry
the smallest Gk NT I can find--it's on my Palm, and if I do use it, it is
somewhat "covertly.") But even in a "normal" church context (at least as we
Americans think of it), I encourage my students not to flaunt their Greek.
One of the last things I want to see happen in ministry is to undermine the
confidence that people have in their English Bible (or Spanish, etc.). But
that raises other philosophical questions that perhaps go beyond the typical
bgreek parameters, so I'll leave it at that.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Rodney J. Decker, Th.D., Assoc. Professor/NT
Baptist Bible Seminary, Clarks Summit, PA, USA
URL: www.NTResources.com
PURL: purl.oclc.org/NT_Resources/
Email: <rdecker> at <NTResources.com>
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list