Thus the task of NT textual criticism is vast and unfinished. Certainly, advances have been made since the material began to be collected and examined in the 17th century. Both Hort and von Soden present texts better than the printed texts of the Renaissance, and provide a sound basis upon which satisfactory exegesis may proceed. It is evident that many of the principles behind the Alexandrian text were sound. But it must be constantly borne in mind that even the best philological work of antiquity demands critical scrutiny if we seek the original text. The textual critic will be as the scribe discipled in the kingdom of heaven, bringing forth from his treasures things new and old. The busy textual projects of the post-war years should bring us nearer to the apostolic ipsissima verba than previous generations were favoured to come; yet we cannot but build on other men’s foundations.[1]
Be humble, and start to be honest, accept textual criticism...
[1] J. N. Birdsall, “VII. Conclusion,” ed. D. R. W. Wood et al., New Bible Dictionary (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 1179.
No comments:
Post a Comment