Thursday, May 17, 2007
There is quite a lot going on at the moment on issues relating to the NT canon, the reception history of Luke-Acts (or lack thereof), gospel traditions in the second century etc. But I feel a bit constrained from discussing them here because they are not strictly speaking 'textual criticism'. What do you think? Should we stick to variants, manuscripts, methods and textual criticism; or can we also touch on canon issues (which are indeed often closely connected with textual criticism and history)?
Posted by Peter M. Head at 1:55 pm