Re [B-Greek] Bad grammer in Rev??
Schmuel
schmuel at escape.com
Thu Jan 13 19:49:43 EST 2005
Hi b-greek,
George
>The tendency of the Byz Maj text to "rectify" the readings of the NT to
>make them more correct Greek is well documented.
Schmuel
First, the forum should note that what Will addressed in his post is affirmed
as correct, and is often overlooked in these discussions, the supposed
errors simply do not exist in the Textus Receptus, the Greek behind the
Reformation and Protestant Bibles, from Geneva and Luther and Reina-Valera
to the King James Bible.
The supposed tendency mentioned is of course is based upon a theory that the
Byzantine Text is a later text, which many fine scholars from Dean John Burgeon
and William Scrivener, in earlier days, to Professor Maurice Robinson and Thomas
Holland in more modern days, would take absolute and complete exception.
George
> This is not a forum for textual criticism so I will restrict myself to one
> comment only which will not here be further discussed by me.
Schmuel
And I will likewise limit myself to one shortish response.
George
> By adopting a text which reads more smoothly than that of the critical text
>you are denying the validity of a number of principles of textual criticism which
>seem to me to be well-founded.
Schmuel
And many others consider to be grossly overused
George
<snip example>
> The principle of textual criticism involved here is that the lectio difficilior (more difficult reading) is
> likely the more original. One's reconstruction of the text may be a correct understanding of what the
> author intended (as in the English example given), but the original nevertheless is the uncorrected
> form.
Schmuel
According to the tenets of the most popular modern textcrit.
However, there are many severe difficulties with the overuse of the lectio difficilior principle.
In the general sense I would suggest reading the material of Professor Maurice Robinson,
http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Robinson2001.html
New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority
In addition Professor Robinson wrote an excellent article on two verses in Mark
that were considered among the hardest to defend by a Byzantine Priority position,
in answer to a challenge by Gordan Fee. In one of these examples you will can
what I would call a "textbook case" of the misapplication of the lectio difficilior principle.
http://www.tren.com/e-docs/search.cfm?oid=x&action=query&title=Passages
Two Passages In Mark: A Critical Test For The Byzantine-Priority Hypothesis
The article is available from back issue of "Faith & Mission" magazine, from the
school where Professor Robinson teaches, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
Since this is not a textcrit forum, and since the Textus Receptus is in
fact the historic Reformation/Protestant NT, and since the discussions
of Byzantine vs. Alexandrian Priority are essentially OT here (moderator
can interject) I will point out my objection to this response to my post.
I will however point out one aspect that is often neglected. The blanket overuse
of lectio difficilior involves an a priori assumption of an errant original text, and is
based upon the presumption that the New Testament.is not an Inspired text.
So, if one does keep any priority to Inspiration in their view of the NT text, they would
then be very wary of misusage of any principles where they are presupposing an
errant NT text .
Perhaps that will close up our diversion into textual criticism. Back to the Greek,
Textus Receptus/Byzantine and Alexandrian/Critical Text.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
Queens, NY
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list