tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post7031454176903641867..comments2024-03-28T19:21:17.654+00:00Comments on Evangelical Textual Criticism: Tregelles’s Mustard SeedP.J. Williamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04388225485348300613noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-54839282345576719752018-09-24T19:37:43.239+01:002018-09-24T19:37:43.239+01:00"Loosely based" would be a better descri..."Loosely based" would be a better description, since there are differences in theory and method involved. <br /><br />I'll let Dirk Jongkind or Pete Williams comment on that matter.Maurice A. Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05685965674144539571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-17772398424702985512018-09-22T03:34:12.378+01:002018-09-22T03:34:12.378+01:00I believe the new THGNT is based on Tregelles'...I believe the new THGNT is based on Tregelles' edition. A. J. MacDonald, Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02606590381956913426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-9855515381129610372018-09-21T22:31:50.429+01:002018-09-21T22:31:50.429+01:00Although Tregelles and Hort were friends (Hort wro...Although Tregelles and Hort were friends (Hort wrote the Introduction to Tregelles' edition after the latter became debilitated), I doubt that Tregelles necessarily would have "heartily rejoiced" over WH's edition with its over-dependence on B and Aleph. Rather, he likely would have continued to promote his own "comparative criticism" position, placing a greater reliance on MS readings also supported by pre-4th century patristic testimony. <br /><br />In actuality, Tregelles' edition in terms of both theory and method was superior to both the vagaries of Tischendorf and the narrowed scope of WH. A pity that his edition did not garner the support it deserved.Maurice A. Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05685965674144539571noreply@blogger.com