Time for another round of everyone’s favorite game, “Who Said It?” No using Google, although in this case it won’t help you anyway.
Update: Peter Montoro was correct. This is from Klaus Wachtel in the introduction to Part 1.1 of the ECM III on Acts (p. 30*).
Since the Textus Receptus was overcome by the scholarly textual criticism of the 19th century, there is tenacious negative bias against the Byzantine majority text. Wherever well-known, older textual witnesses like Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and even more so in combination with a papyrus, stand against the majority of minuscules, the decision against the majority text was often made easily, without seriously considering the quality of the variants in question.One hint: it is not Maurice Robinson.
Update: Peter Montoro was correct. This is from Klaus Wachtel in the introduction to Part 1.1 of the ECM III on Acts (p. 30*).
Metzger??
ReplyDeleteNope!
DeleteLetis?
ReplyDeleteGood guess. But no.
DeleteHort
ReplyDeleteSteven Avery
ReplyDeleteEpp
ReplyDeleteGiven that it says "there is" where "there has been" would be more natural English I imagine this will be a continental scholar. Kurt Aland?
ReplyDeleteYou're in the right city.
DeleteThis is from a recent Paw Patrol episode. Marshall doubled down on the majority text against Chase’s more eclectic perspective.
ReplyDeleteBut which episode?
DeleteFred Wisse
ReplyDeleteGood guess. But nope.
DeleteKlaus Wachtel. "Notes on the Text" ECM of Acts 1.1 pg 30
ReplyDeleteBingo! Well done.
Delete1st choice: Burgon. 2. Miller. 3. Scrivener.
ReplyDelete1. No. 2. No. 3. No again.
Delete