A forum for people with knowledge of the Bible in its original languages to discuss its manuscripts and textual history from the perspective of historic evangelical theology.
Interesting links. But who is Andrew Wilson? I couldn't find any info about him on that site. I have some thoughts about what I read so far. But I'll keep them to myself until I make sure I read him right.
He's an elder in a free church in Britain, and obviously a Greek scholar outside the mainstream of scholarly opinion.Fortunately, there are still a few of those left.
You didn't look in the FAQ on the site, Eric.Actually, I am not an elder in a free church in Britain. I was an elder in my church in Australia (and in my church being an elder approximated to the NT idea of elders, it was not just an honorific ecclesiastical title), but I have been in full-time Christian ministry for the last 12 years, both in Australia and in the UK, where I am now.I have had an interest in NT Tc since inheriting the library of a Christian classicist in my late teens. The question is perhaps irrelevant, however. One does not need a Ph.D to identify, count and categorize singular readings in critical apparatuses.As to a comment made by Jim Leonard on the Yahoo Groups TC site, I am not a Byzantine text proponent, nor, as is made quite clear, is the book an argument for that position. I would perhaps be closest in thinking to Sturz. However, this does not means that I accept all his arguments. It simply means that I accept his main argument - that the Byzantine text-type is not recensional. I am quite happy to accept Alexandrian (non-Byzantine) readings as original if they have sufficient support and they make better sense. Examples of this tend to be fewer in the gospels than in the epistles, but I am quite open to the possibility.