[B-Greek] Very interesting GNT, _A Readers Greek New Testamen t

bgreek at ntresources.com bgreek at ntresources.com
Fri Apr 30 08:06:26 EDT 2004


Here's a sample of some of the data that some have inquired about. This is a
quick check, and I've not double-checked, recounted, etc., but I think
accurate enough to indicate what's involved. I don't intend for this to
become a text-critical discussion, but I think it's relevant to indicate
what sort of text you would be reading if you used the RGNT. 

I used the first half of Mark (chs 1-8) for this (had it mostly finished
yesterday before I left my study when Don's last post using Matt. arrived or
I might have used Matt.). I wish I had time to do the entire NT, but that's
not feasible.

In these 8 chapters there are 21 textual notes in RGNT. Of them, only 17
differ from UBS/NA. (The other 3 represent textual notes in NIV that the
editors apparently thought worth mentioning--the intro mentions this; there
are 3 additional textual notes in NIV in this portion that are not mentioned
in RGNT.)

Using somewhat dated text. crit. terminology (but perhaps widely enough
known to be a useful frame of reference--and I fully understand that
"Western" and "Caesarean" are highly debatable, etc.; I don't consider
either valid categories for Gk NT), here's where RGNT textual choices align;
with:
Byz, 3; West, 1; Caes, 1; Alex,* 4; or with multiple text-types: Alex* &
Byz, 1; Caes & West, 2; Byz, West, Caes, 2.

*"Alex" here is often aleph alone, so tech. not pure Alex.; I've made
generalizations here and identified the groupings by the major uncial
representatives of each text-type. I understand that this is not a
full-fledged, technical classification. And I've only noted the major
external Gk evidence; no consideration of internal factors or of versions,
patristics, etc. have been made.

This quick survey suggests that this is, indeed, an eclectic text. The f.
figures, I would suggest, support my claim that this text is within the
parameters of a modern critical text. These 17 differences from UBS/NA
constitute only about .036 of the variant units listed in NA27 (17 of 468 in
Mk 1-8, not counting pure conjectures [e.g., @ 4:29] or variants which
affect only punctuation [e.g. @ 7:18].) If we added the minor variants (NA27
appendix 2, pp. 721-24), this figure drops to .027 (17 of 626). In the same
portion, based on the data in NA27 appendix 3 (pp. 751-52), NA25 differs
from NA27 59 times (.126).

So unless we want to argue that a student should never read NA25, I think
that for reading purposes, the RGNT is (at least in my test portion)
"essentially the same text" as UBS/NA. That does not suggest that RGNT is
the preferred text for exegesis and certainly not for text. crit.--but then
it doesn't profess to be intended for that purpose. Nor do I necessarily
agree with the individual textual choices made--but that's true of the
UBS/NA text as well.) The textual apparatus in RGNT is only provided to clue
the reader to where this text differs from UBS/NA. (Phil's comments last
evening re. the purpose of RGNT are on target and relevant here as well--as
are Brent's that just arrived as I was about to post this message.)

And since someone else speculated on this last evening also, let me add an
"official" word from Zondervan regarding why this text was used. I have
permission from Zondervan to post the following statement/explanation (and
no, I have no connection with Zondervan, and am not receiving any benefits
from my comments re. the RGNT here):

"If you think it is appropriate, you may post the following comments on the
B-Greek Bulletin Board. You can say it comes from the Zondervan editor who
worked on the GRNT.
" 
"I have read with interest the comments about the RGNT. Our original goal
was to go with the UBS 4 text. For six months I attempted through phone
calls and emails to get the rights from the Bible Society to use the text,
but no one at their office would respond to me. I am not sure why. Finally,
we decided, if the project was to move ahead (it was already under
contract), to go with a text that we could get rights to, namely, the
reconstructed text behind the NIV.
" 
"Just for the record, the translators of the NIV began with the UBS 3 text
and made a number of modifications as they went along."


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
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