The Majority Text Theory, History, Methods and Critique (Daniel B. Wallace)

7/26/2019 The Majority Text Theory, History, Methods and Critique (Daniel B. Wallace)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-majority-text-theory-history-methods-and-critique-daniel-b-wallace 1/31

JETS 37/2 (June 1994) 185-25

THE MAJORITY-TEXT THEORY:HISTORY, METHODS AND CRTQUE

DANEL B. WALLACE*

For the rst twothirds of the twentieth century, NT textal criticscold speak ith oe accord: The textu recept (TR had nally been ladto rest. I 899 Marvi Vincet rerred to it as a "historical monment

that "has been summarly rejected as a bass r a correct text1 T Robertso i 26 declared The Tets ecepts is as dead as Qee e2

Eght years later Leo Vaganay siilarly pronounced last rites over thecorse3 Ad jst three decades ago Bruce Metzger cold jstiably dismssthe cotemporay dense o the Byzatie tet i a mere otnote4

The sitation today s dstubingly dierent Gone is the era whe K/T advocates cold be d oly in the backwaters of antiintellectalAmerica dametalism small bt growig umer of stdets of theT in N orth erica and to a lesser degree in urope n particlar theNetherlands and reat rta are embracing a view that was left r

dead ore tha a cetry agoamely that the origal tet s to beud in a majority of Mss.5 The maortytext MT6 theory is also making

* Dame Walace 1s ass1stant prossor of New estaent stdies at allas Theolocal Seary, 3909 Sw1ss Avene, allas, TX 7504

1 M R Vcent, A Histo of the Textual Cnticism of the New Testamet New York ac1llan, 899) 15

2 A T Robertson Studies m the Text of the New Testamet ondon Hodder and Stoughton,96 53 ctg H rner, The Study of the New Testamet 49

3 agana, itat a a critique textuee eotestametaire Pas, 934) Engsh translat1on A Itroduct to the Textua Cnticism of the New Testamet London 93 73

4 B M Metzger, The Text of the New Testamet ts Trasmiss, Corruptio ad Restora-

tio New ork Oxrd, 964 136 n 1 etger ere speaks of "the anachromst1c vews ofBurgon ressc1tated recent b Edward F H1ls withot feeng the necess1t of a crtqueIn the sae ear J H Greenee could speak of the work of Brgon and 1ller the last decades of the neteenth centur as the nal dense of the extus Recetus He, oo, und1lls' resrrecton of Burgons v1ews "srpsg, calg the work a "schoar cos1t (troductio to New Testamet Textua Cnticism [Grand Ra1ds Eerdans, 964] 8-8

5 he aorit ext Soc1et (estabshed 988 after two ears ex1stence cod boast aebersh1 of 6 seventeen contes (W N Pckerg, "State of the Umon-ear wonpubshed aper crcated fro the pres1dent to ebers of the aor1t ext Soc1et, Janar 99) A prear ebersh1 st of 1 sent to ebers of the soc1et 989 andto wh1ch 1 hae access cluded e1ght o Great Bta, three fro the Netherlands, twoo esewhere Erope thogh none Geran) and ten o th1rdword contr1es r

cpal Brail) ebersh1 reqred the s1gng of the owg credo " beeve that the bestaroach to the og¡nal wordg of the ew estaent is through the aor1t ext, or wishto cooperate testg that hothes1s onsequent not ai the ebers ebrace the theor Bes1des the aorit ext Soc1et there are two other soc1etes that spor the trad1t10nal text he mtar1 an B1ble Soc1et Great Br1ta exstence sce 1831 has sce



86 OURNA O THE EVANGEICA HEOOGCA SOCEY

inroads ino hird-wold missionary an ranslaon endeavor.7 As in hepaalel case of Macan pioiy, poponens o a inoiy vew ae yingo eopen an ssue once ought o be seled Signicanly in e hird ediion of he ext of the ew estament was now necessary r Mezger odevoe ve pages o a dscssion of he esusciaion o John Burgon'sviews8

Ts resuscaion is so miceed a a mee criiqe would eovely simpisc Conseuenly is pape w aemp ee genea ojecives: 1 o survey he hisory o he essciaion 2 o eamine briey he vaous mehods whin he radionae camp an (3) ooe a ciique of he vaious sans as we as o e unfying pesupposions of e MT eory

. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE MODERN MAJORT-TXT MOVMNT

To ndesan e moden MT movemen one mus begn wih Burgon. ough here was a aus of amos seven decades eween Bugonan e nex scolaly ene o he adiiona e vuay al sucenes oday rely on Bugon r impeus and aticulaon. Hence bereooking a e modern perio i is necessay o eamine Brgons views nsoe deal

Te MT movemen (if 1 may speak a bi hyperbolcaly) began immediaely ae e epochmaking pubcaon ofB. F. Wesco an F J A. Hors

958 v1gorously supported the TR under H Brown's eadershp (see D D Sieds Recent Attempts to Defend the Byzante Text of the Greek New Testament [Ph D d1ssertation, ort

Worth Soutwestern Bapst Teoogcal Semary 98] 020) The Dean Burgon Socety

uded Phladep1a on November 34 978 by D A Wa1te D O Fuer and E L Bynum

aso staunchy defends te TR see Sh1eds, Recent Attempts 4266) The name is a cuos1tysce Burgons v1ews would d1squafy 1m om members1p te socety amed after 1msee beow

6 In t1s essay "maoty text or MT) rers to the text und te maoty of extat Greekwtesses Ma1orit Text rers to te pubshed text edited by Z C Hodges and A L Farstad(The Greek New Testament accordg to the aorty Text d ed Nasv1lle Tomas Neson98 textus receptus TR a name oginatg an advert1sg blurb the second ed1t1on633 of the Ezev1r brothers Greek T refers to ay edt1n of the Greek NT that s based pr1

may on rasmus text trad1t1na text an tentionay amb1guous term rers to tat rmof text that 1s und e1ter te TR or the Ma1ority Text or a prox1m1ty of e1ther of teseother words soe rm of the Byzate text Advocates of the trad1ona text the woud

cude str1ct TR propoents as wel as MT proponents

7 Cf E A Nda "The New Testament Greek Text te Third Word New Testament Tex-tual Crticsm ts Sgncance for Exegess ed E J Epp and G D Fee Oxrd Clarendon98) 375380 1ckeg the rst pres1dent of the Maoty Text Soc1ety may be partaly re

spons1be tat he 1s a m1ss1nary w1t Wyce Bibe Trasators to Bra Cf aso J Ca

ow who as a Wyce transator asks h1s coeagues to have an open md about te MT "Ope Letter Regardg Textua Ct11sm Notes on Translaton 90 982 3335

8 B etger The Text o the New Testament 3d earged ed New York Oxrd 992 283284 29293 Uess otherwise stated a c1tat1os of Metgers Text w1 be of th1s ed1

on Remarkaby C B Amphouxs thoroughly updated 99 rev1s1on of Vaganays ntroduc·

ton s1mply ecoes Vaganays op1o tat ts notoous text is now dead t 1s to be hoped rever (L Vaganay Introducton d ed Cambrdge 99 2) None of the modern advocatesof the Byate text s menoned anywhere the book



THE OITY·TEXT THEOY: TOY ETOD ND CTIQUE 187

The New Testament in the Original Greek and concomitantly he RevisedVerszon of the New Testament (both n 881). Inter alza, Westcott and Hortarged cogeny r the riorty and seconary nature of the Syan Byzante) tex-type.9 Not surpsngy, tese voumes proved a catayst rreactn b man eccesastics wo vored the tradtonal text Chief amongtem was John W Burgon dean of Cichester Wih a vtrioc pen he marshaed several attacks against te dons of Cambridge.10 Te attacks conssted maly of tree eements: a condemnation of Westcott andor's vote ss (M, B and to a lesser egree A, C and D) 2 a retaonof te excson/ateraton of certa passages ud the K/R esp.Mark 16:9-20; on :53-8:; Tm 316 and 3 an articuaion of hsown method whch amouned to (wth w eceptions a ese of he readgs und n the majoty of ss.

The bedrock of Burgons tex-crica views was a beef n verba plenary inspraton and the doctrine e ferre om tprovienta reservatn. "t s ce om inatention to ths crcumstance tatmsconcepon prevas n that department of Sacred Scence known asTextua Crcsm.2 e argued:

Thee x1sts no ason r supposmg that th D Agnt, who m h s mstac thus gav to and h Scpus ofTut stagtway abcatd Hsoc ook o h ca of Hs wok abadond tos pcos wtgs tohi t That a ppta} ac was wough th psat0n-hatcopyss w poctd agamst sk o o o l n ptd o

9 B F Wetcott ad F J A Hort The New Testaent m the Original Greek, [n,] ntroduc

tion [a Appendix (Cambrge Macmla 88 9311910 Burgo pubhe tree artcle te Quartery Review tat were later orporated ad

shgtly rev1ed a book The Reision Reised Loo Jo Murray 883 T work bee repte woe or part evera! tme by ower ofBurgo He ao rote evera

oter volume lug The Last Twee Verses of the Gospe accordmg to St Mark Vmdicatedagast Recent Critica Ob1ectors and Estabished (Oxr ame Parker 8 a to voume omplete by E M1er The Traditiona Text of the Hoy Gospes Vdicated and Estab·

ished oo George Be 896 a The Causes of the Corrption of the Traditiona Text othe Hoy Gospes oo George Bel 1896

11 Burgo art1ulate meto "eve Tet of Trut tqu1ty or Pm1tvee

2 Coet of Wtee or Number 3 Vaety of Evee or Catohty 4 Repetabhty ofWtee or Wegt 5 Cotty or Ubroke Trat1o 6 Ev1ee ofte Et1re Paage

or Cotext 7 tera Co1erato or Reaoablee (Traditna Text 2829 Te etreut of t approa 1 reahty a upport of te MT almot a te time Huo

ote tat Burgo' reultat text r tte from te Maority Text ("Cage tat Burgo

ae te TR upubhe paper ruate to member of te Maoty Text Soety990] Burgo wa able to apply text-rtal pr1pe towar te reato of 1 o T

text oy to Matte 4 But ere of te 52 vaato betee te T a te MaorityText Burgo e w1t te Maority Text 47 tme w1t te T tw1e bot were tere a

gt ph te maoty ofMSS) a opt r tree reag ot are by eter te TRor te Maority Text We may ote rter tat Pkeg tatly equate Burgo eve et

oftrut w1t maoty rue I 1 olug ummary o Burgo meto e tate "1 ubmttat ue proe reure u to reeve a or1ga tat r of te text w1 upporte by

te maoty of toe 1tee W N P1kerg The dentity of the New Testaent Text [reve avle Toma Neo 1980 8

Burgo Traditiona Text 9



88 JOURNAL OF THE EVNGELICAL HEOOGICAL CETY

adulteratmg shaely copes of the Depos1t-no one, i s presed s soweak as to sppose Bt t s qte a derent thmg to cla that al down theages the sacred wtmgs st needs have been God's pecar care that the

Church under H has watched over the w1th mtegece and sk1l has recozed whch copes exhbt a bcated whch an honest transcbed texthas general sanct0ned the one and genera dsalowed the other 1 a tterl dsmcmed to beeve-so gossl probabe does t see-that at theend of 00 ears 995 copes ot of ever thosand sppose wll prove ntrstworth and that the one two three r or ve whch ream whose conentwere tll esterda as good as unknow w be nd to have retamed the secre of wha he Hol Spt oa mspred 1 a tterl unabe to beevem shot that Gods prose has so entre ed that at he end of 00 earsch of the text of the Gospel had m pomt of ct t be pcked b a Geranctc out of a wastepape basket m the conen of St Catherme and that the

enre text had reamed m negect dng fteen centes and had probablowed ther srval to that negect whlst hndreds of others had been thedto peces and ha eueathed ther wtness to copes ade o the 13

Here, seed-plot are the ma arguments of te MT teory to tsday 1 theoogica a priori tt God as preserved te text nd thtsc reserve text has been ccessble to te Crc every age 2 anassumtion tat eretcs hve on a arge scae corrupted te text 3 anargent o sttisica robbty reate to te corollary of ccess1bity (vz tht te aJority lS more kely to conta te orig wordgand 4 a rononcement tat a early Byzante ust ave worn ot

Tere l so ft ot to be rre o these r (5) Argumentsbased on terna evdence (e g cno ns sc as preference r te arderand sorter readgs) re vad sce determton of the text s bsedon te "obJective evence of qntty of Mss

The dean's wors have rmed te bss r v1rtay every MT advoctesagents hs centy4 to te extent that aost nothg new hs comeo te MT qarters sce Brgon Frther sc eavy deendence onBurgon expas wy so many MT advocates argue agst te Westcottort teory per se rater thn agst the reasone ecectcsm of today

Srprisgy as mch energy s e expended on a dense of te Byzante text Brgon ed to dstance hmself om the TR Atoug s writ

gs cled bref sect0ns sc as "Trdton Text not dentica wit te

3 lb1d -24 See Sheds Recent Attempts, r mstance Te st thee chapters ae ent1ted "Te

Poua Defenders of the extus Receptus "he Schoay Defendes of te Textus Receptus

and "The Dendes of te MaJoty ext In each capter thee is a sect0n o two on Burgon

and te petus he povded r the va1ous groups Today there s even a Dean Bugon Socetywhch has vrtuay canozed hs vews D O Fuer, J P Geen Sr D A Wate and others

contmue to reprt 1s works

15 What was barey excusabe m (cf A atm, A Ctcal Exaatzo of the Westcott

Hort Tetua Theo" [h D dssertatn, Daas heoogica Semay ]) becoes ntoeabe

Pckermg, Idetity, two chapters, copsmg aost 7 pages of text, ae ded1cated to actque of the Westcott Hort teory the sevent chater Detemmg the dentity of the ext

s erey a eash of Burgon's seven tests of truth) So out of date are ckeng's arguents tat

G D ee, m rev1ewmg ts work coud speak of Pckermgs negect of teray sores of scoary

studes that contavene hs asseons, addmg that "the overooked bbogahy hee s so age



E ORIY-EX EORY ISORY EOS RIIQUE 89

Receved Text "6 an rare statements savowng the TR,17 tere s no scusso of Acts 8:37 the Jhnnu or te ast sx verses of theApocalypse-weknow an teologcay sgcant passages where the

M parts company wt the TR I spte of Brgon's frens cang s crtcs imprecso i ts matter scrros8 te t ay wt m as mcas wth them. The rreachng rests of Brgons lure have been twopronged: ( 1) To ts ay TR advocates cam Brgon as ther champon 9

and 2 notradtoasts cose te R wt the MT.2º

Recent MT proponents eqenty cam that Brgons argments haveever been answered21 Yet i part te reaso r no ontrpoit rebtta s de to rgos acd pe22 Westcott once commente I canot readMr rgon yet A gace at one or two senteces eas me to tik thaths voence answers msef23 Ha Brgon tempere hs argments

peraps te dscsso woud ave prove more protabe r ot sidesUnrtatey e generate more heat than ght Eqaly nrtnate hsatitue set the toe r a ter generatons of MT advocates24

ha i can hardly be g1ven m a onoe For exape, 1 know of eleve deren studes on ·ge aoe ha contradc a of Pckerg's d1scussn and no oe of he s even recogzed o

have exsed" A Cr11que of W N Pckergs The ldentzty of the New Testament Text A Rev1ew Artcle" WTJ 4 [9879] 15)

6Burgo Trdzto Text 5 so ed he able of coens hough o m he exproper)

7 H1s ceares saee o h1s eec s bued a otnoe ahough he cies o spec1c

rereces where he T errs Burgo Revzszon Revised 2 n 218Burgon d1d no conted r accepnce of the exus Recepus as has so ofen beenscurlousy saed CH C Hos1er Codex B and lts Aes A Study and an ldzctment [London

Berard Quatch 94] 5)9 E g as en1ned n 5 supra, Burgo's vews woud dsquafy h1 o ebershp

m he socey aed afer h smce ha socey sauchy deds he º See aer dscussn Cf True or Fase? The Westcott Hort Tetua Theo Eamed ed D O Fuler, Grad

apds Grand apds nerna1na 973) 2 P Mauro Wh1ch Verso?" True or Fase 95 N Pcermg Contbu1n of Joh Wa Brgo o New esae [exua] Crcs"Tue or Fase 304 The rs o artcuae ha Burgos v1ews were unanswered ad uanswerabe was Burgon hsef (Revzszon Revzsed 36 ne s eped o hmk hat hese aer wersave spy ae Burgons word o he aer w1hou bohermg o research he d1scusso

he ast 0 years Buros aude can be seen m the Scpure quoato hat mroduces h1s Revzszon Re

vzsed I is hapened uo he accordg o the true proverb Kuwv empla� ém o ifüovspµa" (2 e 2 22)-a ex ha Burgo here appes o esco ad Hor A perusa of hewor wl dscose a pehora of exapes of aaory laguage aed a he wo Cabridgeschoars F G Keyo a coneporary ofBuro poed ou tha he unuesoabe learof [the ar1ces wh1ch becae Revzszo Revised] was argey eurased by he extravagancead eperance of ther one Our zbe an the ncet Mauscpts 4h ed Lodo yread Sposwoode 939J 242) ve A L Farsad he curre res1de of he Maoy ex So1ey concedes ha Burgos stye s causc Why Becae a Maoty Tex Advocae unubshed aper dsbued o ebers of he Maoy Tex Socey d ] 3 Cf aso Marwo ad1s ha Buro was rascbe su dogac ad rash Westcott-Hort 52, 69

3 eer o Wesco o Hor cober 28 Lfe ad Letters of Brooke Foss Westcotted A Westco London aclan 903 1 404)

24 The conen of h1s vecve usuay mvoves chares of heresy For exape D Fuerspeas of basad Bbes outerfezt or Geue Mark 16 Joh 8 2d ed rad apdsrand ap1ds nteraona 978] ) e adds rher ha he dev s he aserd behmd



190 OURNL O THE EVNGELI HEOLOGL SOEY

After Burgon's death i 1888 no scholar took up the cause of the traditiona text unti 956 Traditonaists, owever, requety aege thatF H A. Scriveer25 ad Herma C Hosker carrie Burgons torchthrough te rst ecades o the twetet century.26 Inter alia, Scvenerwas we kown as Hort's staunchest critic on the Revsed Verson committee ad Hosier wrote a thoroug critique o code B, 27 oe of Hortsvored MSS There s no questio of either Scriveners or oskiers schoarsh Ad atough it is true tat eiter crivener or Hosier embracethe Westcott-Hort theory it s equay true that either o them embraceeven the ndametals of urgos vews. Scriveer, r exame atetze severa amark MT readings such as Joh 7:53-8: and theos 1 im 3:16,

28 embrace stadar tera criteria,29 ad expicty statedthat te Byantine cursives o whc the MT teory rests are without

muc vaue0 Noe o tis is comatbe with urgos views

th1s dection om te KV and TR "Born-aga Chistans th1s twentieth centuy ae cng te most macus and vcous attack pon God's spred Holy Word sce the Garden ofEden And th1s attack began n its modern rm n the pucat1n of the Revsed Vesn o theSciptures n 88 n ngland (p 9 D A Wa1te agues that Westcott and Hot wee unegeneate unsaved, apostate and eetca (The Theoogica Heresies of Westcott and Hort[Collgswood Be r oday 99] 942) W N P1ckerng wose masters thess was onBurgons value to N textua crtc1sm declares that the most ancent MSS cae om a sewerpipe (An Evaluatwn of the Contribution of John W1am Burgon to Ne Testament TextuaCrit1sm Th M thes1s Dalas heologcal Semary 968] 93) lsewhere P1ckeg statesthat Aeph and B have ed that Aeph 1s cealy a 1gge ar tan B and that al the an

centMSS

on wch moden ctcal texts are based ae convcted ars a! (dentity 6, 3Fo mutped lustat1ns ofts knd ofmatoy language c D B Waace InspatonPeservaton and New Testament extual Crit1c1sm Grace Theoogica Journal 2 (99) 3

625 On Scivene cf Martn Westcott Hort 7 R Anderson he Bibe and Mode Citic1sm, Which Bibe2 (th ed , ed D O Fule Grand Rap1ds Grand Rapds nternational 97)

0 E F H1ls, he Kg James Version Defended' (4th ed , Des Moes Crstan Reseach,984) 9 D A Waite Defending the King ames Bibe (Colgswood Bble Today, 99)

446, 39 98 307, on Hoskie c Pckerg dentit 60, 4 A Mat, xamation o teWestcottHort Textual Theoy Which Bibe2 (ed ule 3, 64 66

2 Othe names ae a so sometmes ment1ned on behal ofte trad1tonal text though ther

impact was m1ma Abe P Mart ecame te dender ofthe R Fance ut he d1d ttemore tan echo ugons voce cf J P -P Mart ntroductwn a a citique textuee du Nou-eau Testament (7 vols , Pa1s 88386 C also B G Wkson wose Our Authorized Bible

dcated (Wasgton n p 93 was epted Which Bibe2 7638, A vanov whoseRuss1an Othodox vews are qute compatie wth te tradt1nal text Ivanovs essays om

the Zhurma Moskosko1 Patriarch (946 are summarzed y R P Casey A Russian Othodox Vew of New estament extual Citc1sm, Theoog 6 (97) 4 (mentoned y

Metzger Text 62 Hoskie Codex B2 F H A Scvene, Six Lectures on the Text of the Ne Testament and the Ancient Manu

scripts hch Conta It (Camdge Bell, 87 89 O the 3 passages d1scussed NA6d1sagees wt Ma¡oity Text 33 tmes (not countg those places whee Sc1vene adopts a

eadg und neither Of these 33 stances Scivene adopts the NA6 readg 22 tmes

the Ma;orit Text eadng In A Pa ntroductwn to the Cr1tic1sm of the Ne Testament(4th ed vos London Bel 894 he d1scusses vtualy the same passages wth almost identcal conclus1ons 3

2 Scrivene Pa ntroduction 446, cf h1s spec1c d1scusson Sx Lectures of Cor 49 (pp 8386 Co 2 2 (pp 8789, Jas 2 8 (pp 9899)

30 Scvener, Sx Letures 88 ( commentg on Col 2 2



MAJORIY-X ORY: ISORY MODS AD RIQU 191

Hoskier, too, has been msread. His statement in 1914 that "Burgon's positon remans asolutey unshaken31 though a vorte among MT advocates32 has been stripped of ts context an caveats33 In realty he isareewith Burgon on severa mportant points For example he emraced the nterna! cnons of te arer and shorter reang, 34 aopte reangs und ina sma minority of MSS, especially of the Western strain,35 an expcitly arued aganst the general value of the Byzantine cursves 36 Al of ths is decdey aganst the MT teory Yet Hosker as been haile as one of us yT avocates ecause he not only arged against B reaings-especiayaganst te ackdrop of te Rut because he also wanted to dump atwentetcentu hereses at Horts doorstep37

Te use of Scrvener and Hosker by modernday traditionatext advocates reveas a disturbng twod pattern On the one and, ther percep

tion of results determes alegiance Questions of method rarey surcel that matters is that the traditonal text is armed On the other and,ther peceptwn of results s not based on an examination of a given scoars wrtings Typcaly, lttle more is known about hs vews than that hes theologicaly conservatve, aes ostve references to the TR and crtCes Horts prerred MSS. Because of such shibboleths T proponentsve een repeatey msle into soicitng unwtting support om thedead voices of the past Suc s not ony nteectually dishonest ut alsoraises questions as to wat drives this need r campions

Throug the rst haf of te twentet century, then te tradtonal textwas supporte unequvocay y ony one boa fde scoar Jon Burgonmost seven dcades elapsed bere te traditona text und another scholarly avocate Te rst (and to date ony) textual crtc to den the textseept pe e n ts century was Edward F Hlls38 s credentals wereunmpeacabe: a acelors degree om Yae (34) owe y a TD

31 Hsk1er, Codex B 1 4152 Cf e g Martm Examatwn 153 He 1s here referrmg t Burg's assesse of Smacus ad Vaticaus Hosker

aeded hs reark wth a tte argumg that "we us revise hs ps10 m that Bur-

g mcrrecty used patnstc evdece ad udervalued D

34 Cf H C Hsker oncening the Genesis of the Verswns of the N T (L BerarQuatch 19011 1 2324 oe B 1 460 435 thugh Hsker qckly ade the aveat

Ths es t ct e he shrer text thery m ts lest sese)

5 Cf h1s geeral sateets m oex B 1 v 406 414 460 Bezae bemg ee exra

eus text mueces has a large value whe use m coect with the Synac duets

469 Mre speccaly he adpts Wester a/r monty readmgs r Luke 11 52 bd 421Acts 2 24 übd ) 21 14 (b1d J, a 1 20 b1d 435 1 25 b, uke 23 8 (bd 456460here Hsker aps the wrd rder ud ly m ' 241 sx lecanes ad e ther Greek

wess

6 Ibd 1 434 4637 Ib 1 46848 1s a tay f Hrta hereses

8 be sure, her a ve eded the Rper se But thy are ether acwledged texualcntcs as m the case f P Les r her wrks are ot a schlarly level e g H Brw

e rm1taa Be Scey r D A a1e he Dea Burg Socety here have also eea ew wh have eded he bu wh agam are t typcay acweged as extua cntics

e g ar, Webo H



192 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGEICA EOOGIAL SOIEY

om Harvard w1th a dissertation on textual crtics (946).3 ow was tposs1be r a an wth such credentas ultmatey to ebrace the TR? Eventhough e asced no value to te Byzantine text n is dssertat10n, 0 in re-ality he had ever eft the R is protégé eodore . Lets wtes:

At Ch1cago, Hls reazed that unless one accepted the dogma that the By-ante text type was ofate date and hence umportant one coud never garedbty wth the text sm gld Whaeer hs opomses by1952, lls was reay to return crce to h1s histor Rermed roots andarm wth the Westmster Consson the porty of the Tets ReceptusOnly now he would do so om lly wth the ner sanctum sacorum ofthetet ccsm tade 41

ls' rst and maJor volume n defense of te R was The King JamesVerswn Defeded!, ogally pubshed m 156 He arged even ore

strongy tan did Burgon om prodentia preservaton43 r is v1ew teTR and the not the Byzante MSS pe se was the closest text to te autograpa. I ct is dogatic convctios about providental presevatio edhim to conclude that Erasus was diiney gu1ded wen e ntroduced Vgreadgs to hs Greek text44

Lets cams that Hs "eft ehind a legacy Hstoas will e rced toregard m as te ter of wat is now regarded as the reved eccesas-tca text45 But tis s an exaggeration Those wo cae after him generaly ding h1m too quirkish (ía his strong attacment to the TR) derivedter impetus elsewere Een after Hills ook had circuated r nine years

G D Kpatrck could say No theoreca [as opposed to teoogcal] justicat0n r te serious use of the Textus Recetus as een advanced6

39 H1s also received a Th B from Westster heoog1ca Seminary 38 and a Th Mom Coumbia eoogca Seinary Decatur, GA 0, and egan a doctorate (unsuccess

y) at the Uversty o Chcago ere beg adtted to Harvard D1vinty Schoo For a de

taed and unashaedy sypathetc biography of Hs see P Lets Edard Freer Hills'sContrbutwn to the Reval of the Eccles1ast1cal Text Th M thess, Cander Schoo of eoogy,

870 E F Hs, Te Caesarean Famly o Ne Testamet Mauscrpts (T D dissertaton,

Harvard Dvinity Schoo See especay the na cater whch Westcott-Hort's vew

o the Byzanne text s excty armed

1 Lets Hilss Contrbutwn 0-42 H1s other wel known work ths area was the pouary conceved Believng Bble StudCf Lets Hllss Contrbutwn 8-00 r a neary coee st of Hs terary remains

4 Note the owing quotation that nks nsiraton with reservaon and oth to access

ty "If the doctrine of the Divine inspraton of the Od and New estament sctures is a

true doctrine the doctre of rovdentia preservation of the scrptures must aso e a true

doctre It must be that down through the centues God has exercsed a speca roVdenta

contro over the coying of the scptures and the preservaon and use of te copies so that

trustworthy representatves o the origina text have een avaae to Gods eoe every

age (Kg James Verswn Defended 4 bd -0 He even argued r the authentcty of the Comma Johanneum (Kg

James erswn eended! 0-345 ets Hillss Cotrbutwn 7

46 G D Kptck The Greek New Testament ext of Today and the Tetus Recets," TheNe Testament Hstorcal and Contemporay Perspecte ed H Anderson and W Barcay

Oxrd Bckwe 8



THE MAJORIY-EX HEORY: HISORY, METHOS A CRITQUE 193

The situation changed, howeve, in 1970 because of an article wittenby Zane C. Hdes f Dallas helocal Seminay7 His essay was thenly piece in Fulle's Whzch Bzble? to nteact wth the data In ct talone made an ipesson on Godon D. Fee sucient him to pen anarticle8 that sparked a lively debate between odges an Fee within theages of JETS and elsewhee9 Cnsequently most wil egad Hodgesathe than Hills50 as the eal Bugon redvzvus.51

Hdges aticle52 and subsequent nteraction with Fee was accmpanied by two othe signicant woks:53 a slende voue by Jakob vanBruen54 tat was considered "erudite by one eviewe55 and Wlbu N

Pckerings The Identzty of the New Tetament Text, a book tat gives themost systematic dense of the MT yet in pint (even though t s tanshed nte aia by a lack of interaction with the priary data) 56

7 Z C Hodges, "The Greek Text of the Kg James Ves10n BSac 125 1968 33-35Though ogaly pubshed hs school's Oural 1968 t gaed a much w1der audencewhen repted the st ed1tion o Which Bible2 1970 Uess otherw1se noted a rerences are to the oa aticle

48 G D Fee "Moder Textua Ctsm ad the Reviva! of the Textus Receptus," JETS 211978 1933

49 Hodges responded to Fees artce w1th "Moden Textua Ctc1sm ad the Maot TextA Response JETS 21 1978 13-155 Fee then counteed wth Moden Textual Crt1csmad the Maort Text A Reoder JETS 211978157-160 o whch Hodges respoded w1th"Moder Textua tsm ad the aot Tex A Surreoder

JETS 21 1978 161-16ee ad Hodges cotued to teact wth each others views outs1de of JETS as wel Most otabl Hodges wote The Ange at Bethesda-oh 5 BSac 136 1979 2539 whch Fee aswered w1th n the Iauthetic1t of oh 5 3b" vQ 5 1982 207218

50 Th1s is not to sa that Hls uence has been mi t has spawned at least oe disserta

t1o dedcaed to a retaton of hs vews (R A Taor The Modern Debate concernmg theGreek Textus Recetus A Crtica xamation of the Textual Vews of dward F Hills [Ph Ddssetat1n Geenve Bob ones Uvers1t 193 as wel as one thess h1s dense Let1s Hls's Contributn)

51 deed eve Let1s conceded Hodges uece o he pot that he eoeousl assumedaas Theoogica Semars cossoa stace to cude a beef the tradta ext(Hlls's Contrbutn 16168

52 Hodges has wtte ohe mpotat essas dese of the MT as wel The Crt1ca Text

and the exandran Fam of Reveat1on BSac 119 1962129-138 A eense o the Ma¡orityText Daas aas Semar Book Store d ) "The Ecclesastca Text of RevelationDoes txs? BSac 118 1961 113-122 "Ratasm ad Cotempoa New Testamet TextualC1t1sm BSac 128 1971 27-35 The Woman Taken Adulter ohn 7 38 11) TheText BSac 136 1979 318332

53 We are not hee cudg as sgca the hree volumes eded b Fuer WhichBible2 [970] True or False [1973] and Countereit or enume Mar 16 John 8 (1978] asthese are r the most part e1ther reprts of oder works such as ugons) or the do not

deal w1th the data5 van uggen The Ancent Text o the Ne Testaent Wpeg em1e 197655 D A Caso Km Jaes Versn Debate A Plea or Realis Gad Rap1ds aker

1979) 0 n 356 "Wha s mos noceable ths book of 19 pages is the pauct of exapes of the

method at work The few tha ae given e g 1 Tim 3 16 p 2) are ne exampes of how notto do texua ctcsm sce ickerg s1mp gnoes al the data vers1ona and patistic ev1dece ot to meton tena) that shoot down hs theor Fee "Crtique 23 n 3



194 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

If the 970s marked te rebrth of the MT theory, te 1980s were thedca f s apd gwt. Pickng's ok was we y a scnd ton 1980 and te epoh-makg Greek New Testament accordg to the

Maorty Text eded by Zae C Hdges Arthur L. Farsta et al, 982.57 ug mae by ts et elac n pned edtos of eGeek NT (prmaly vo Soes) rater tha rsthad oatos thstext was the st Grek based o the majoy of Grek wtesses Prelmay stmas on textua rences etwee the TR and eMaorty Text ad bee as low as ve hudred 8 e na text, howeverede up wt nearly quarupe tat amu 59 Tus te Maoty Text

bt reveaed cretey hat the Byzate texttype ad bee pory epreseed y the TR 6 a ease of ths eame a atayst debatesamong tradtatx proponnts But prhaps most surprsg fea

tre of the Maorty Text s the stemmat recostrutos r Jh 7:538:11 ad the e tre bok f Revelat r n these plaes there are seera!mty eags cntay t te tte ad wses6 of edos

Tw years ater oe of te oedtors of the Majorty Text Harry A Sturzpushed a volume62 that was sgat r two reass () t oered evdnc om h papy ta te Byzantne text was aly 6 (2) houghSturz was a edtor of the Maority Text spte of embrag he Mthey), he was qute rta f bo h mhds ad resuts f hs coedts pacula e felt that the nkng of presvatn t nspan

5? A second, corrected ed1ton appeared m 98558 Pckeng "Burgon 2059 By y count 838 derences60 Nevertheless soe rev1ewers ignore these derences assumg that the Ma1orty Text

was erey anoter TR H Otten argues agamst th1s text because it aegedy contams theTR's Cmma Jhanneum (Chrstan News [Septeber 3 982] 4) f the revewer ha bothered to ook at John 5 7-8 m the Ma1rty Text or even rea the mtroduction he woud aveseen hs 1stake Muc less excusabe are te rather careess stateents und K Alandand B Aand The Text f the New Testament An Introductn t the Critca[ Editns and tthe The and Practice o Modern Textual Crticism (Grand Rapds Eerdans 987 2d revand enlarged ed 989 Even m ter second edtn tey faed to d1stmgus the TR o the

Ma1ority Text The ttle clearly reveas the tention of the ed1tn it oers the Textus Receptus p 223) The Aands apparently dd not exaine the Ma1rty Text even m a cursory anner r ther sectn that purportedy copares the N26 text w1th the Ma1rty Text pp 29735 cdes ur passages Luke 7 36 Acts 8 37 34 24 6b8a) that are und m the TRbut athetze y bot N6 and the Marity Text Irocaly their request that MT advocatesconsder te llog exapes wthout preudce p 297) reveas ther own

61 In 978 1 had the pvilege of takg the course ew Testaent Textual Ctics oHodges at Dalas Seary n that course he mcated ore than once hs condent hope that1s yettobecopleted steat1c reconstructns would ly d1cate MT readmgs

62 H A Strz The Byzante Text-Type and New Testament Textual Crtcsm asveThoas eson 984 oay a doctora 1ssertaton done at Grace Theologica SemaryWona Lake 967

63 5 stmctvey yzantme readmgs u m the papy Th1s ca vz that te Byzan

te text is early because t s und the papy) Sturzs centra thess has becoe te bassr yperboc cas by MT advocates For a baanced revew o Sturz see M W Hoes mTrinty Journa 6 985) 225228 See aso the ctqe beow



THE MAJORITYTEXT THEORY: HSTORY, METHODS AND CRITIQUE 95

was wrongheade64 ad that the Byzantine text was primus nter paes

amng te three main tet-types t the sle keeper of the autograpa.6 5Strz's work set a precedent r a vlme edited by Theodre P Letis in

987. I spte of its ttlewhich sggests interaction wit mainstreatextal criticsthe athrs all ol to the traitinal tet Neverthelessts "nesded symposim67 is sgicant i that it is the rst tome mte traditoal-text camp t engage in inhose debate (togh tis to sesied) Te rst part s a polgw r te MT, written by tersParts two and three are denses of the K and TR respectively almostentirely written by Letis an in reactn to the MT theory As sch Letiswrk mars a departure m Davi Otis Fullers vlmes r in te latterT a TR advcates were presented side by side withot a hit of qarrelamng temselves68 The imression given by Fullers volmes was that

and T avocates were nly interested i results tat sc resltsculd be distinguished only minimally and tat methodolgical qestinswere irrelevant so lg as they ened u with vrtually te same text Letis' work altere this impressin spite f is wn views clnig tse ofHills Letis can be crete wt ntrodcing int te traditioaltext campse measure f critica! self-eamiation Ts s a reeshig evelopment thoug it is still motivated by results rater ta by qestions ofmethd That is Letis condemns MT adcates recisely becase their resultat tet is t the TR 69

Te year after Letis vlme was publised te Mority Text Society wasrmed with Pickerig as its rst resent At te present time tere arever 160 members tg not all espse the M psitin 70 Tw sigicant

64 turz Byzantme Text-Type 37665 hough turz's resultant text ked very much ke the Ma1orty Text, the methd that

produced 1t was d1eret severa! 1mportat pots e beeved that al the text-types und

ther os secndcetury reces0ns When a maor1ty f texttypes (ot MSS) agreed he

adopted the readg ce there is greater hmgee1ty the Byzate text tha e1ther

the Alexada r Wester such a block vote fte became the decdg ctr turz Byz

antme Text Type 53131 The Second Century Geek New Testaent Matthew (La irada

B0a oege Book tore 197366 The Maoity Text Essays and Revews m the Contmumg Debate (ed P Let1s Frt

Waye 198 he pubsher is either the st1tute r Bibca extua tudes as met1edn the cover) r the nst1tute r ermat1n Bbcal tudes (handstamped n the tte page

he voume cudes art1ces by P1ckerg J A Borand et al a o wh1ch had bee pub

shed esewhere addt10 Letis wrte ur chapters and the troduct10 (one whch had

bee prevousy pubshed

67 etzger Text 291 n 168 he 1mpress0n ct was s strg the drect0n of uam1ty that bere the Ma1o

ity Text was pubshed ess a schoar than G Fee apparety thught dges was resurrect

g the m toto cf ee "odern extual t1c1sm and the eviva the Textus Receptus"

2369 ee especiay the trductin to Contmumg Debate ed Les 12470 or do a members have rma Bibca trag r a knowledge Greek a brchure

d1strbuted by the aoty ext ocety teded to soct new members the queso 1s

asked Are a our members schoars? he answer o oe members ca s1ght read theGr many ca use the r1ga w1th study heps thers have ever stud1ed Gr he sze o

the orgazat1 then s not d1cat1ve o the nma schary support behd 1t



196 JOURNAL OF THE VANGELCA EOLOGCAL OCETY

developments have occrred va e Majority Text Socety: (1) a substantalicrease n tra-T debates,1 and 2 a cocomtat decrease i cotacwt onT advocates. Tis secod developmet is as nheaty as the rstis heahy r at the very me i whic tradtonatext propoents are demostratig tat tey are no "n ockstep ogeher ad virta coes of Zane C. Hodges2 w on te otsde realze hs. The daloge wt otsders has been largey ct o3 apparetly becase te theologcal presppositions of tese tradtoaltext advocates tends toward precudng daoge74

Wle Aerca tradtonatext advocates were engaged n debate aDtc scholar qietly prodced what s probably te est vole n dense of he MT poston to dae Wlem Francscus Wssen's T. dssertato75 nder the sperviso of Jakob va Bruggen deas with data na sstaed sho wtot resortg to teologica ivectves In contrast

to most MT denseswch are comprsed of otatons om oderday athors evdence o the nmerica speriority o e Byzantine texand a theoogca a priori that the aorty ms be rghtWisselns

1 As ev1denced by the papers wtten r te Maoty Text Socety y its members and dstrute peodcaly For example Pckerg takes on hs rmer entor Hodges an essay

entted "The Name of [M Theory] s Baspemed among the Revewers (unpushe papercrcuate to memers of te Maoty Text Socety Septemer 1988) t to e noted tat teethodoloca crtques are st motvate an d1ctated by resuts

2 Anon "Under te 'Bg Top Ma1orty Text Nes 2/2 Fal 1992 1 Te essay quotesZ Hodges as sayg Let the reader smply oserve that th1s artce Iustrates te vtaty of

the Maoty Text movement wch s a g tent tat can accomodate more than one perspec·tve on NT textua ctcsm 3 But the Netherlands tere s stll dalogue between MT proponents and oters J van

Bruggen and H J e Jonge are te maor adversaes Cf ther exchange Met andere Woor

den Kwartaalblad uan het Nederlads Bbelgeootschap 78 (98889 de Jonge, "De tekst

vorm een oecumesc kerkbbe Met adere Woorde 7 (988 3-5 van Bruggen e

ondge beetekt en de tekst van het Neuwe Testament Met andere Woorden 1988 6-

0, de Jonge "Reacte op het artke van prof Van Bruggen Met adere Woorde 7 988 1

van Bruggen Reacte op het artke van prof De Jonge Met andere Woorde 7 988 2 van

Bruggen "e vertroostg der Schr1ften Met andere Woorden 8 1989 78 These deateswere owed up by T van opk who argued that turgca uences helped to shape te

Byzante text rm Tekskrtk tet het wegen of weegt het telen? NedTTs 45 [199] 101

06 want to thank mothy J Ralston of alas Semary r rgng tese references to

my attent0n74 nerrancy and preservaton are creasgy held n ont of the members o te Maoty

ext Socety as vtal to te vew s It mere concdence that aer ghtg several attles te arena of ev1dence cf e g te debates between Hodges and ee JETS), MT proponentshave stopped te dalogue and reasserte ther th stance? Cf W N Pckerg Mark 6 9

20 and the Doctre o nsprat1n (npushed paper crculated to memers of Maoty Text

Socety 1988 where te sole arguent s theoogca Maoty Text Socety rocure enttledWhat IS the Maoty Text Socety n d ) whch te bas1c ptch r potenta members s

theoogca J A Borland Re-examg New estament TexuaCtcal Prncpes and Practces Used to Negate nerrancy JETS 25 (1982 499506 T ets makes a smlar oserva

ton complag tat the argument om statstcs used te 90s was a poor substtute r

theoogca convct0n and that Hodges reay does have a dden agenda (Cotim Debate

92 n 3)

75 W F Wsselk Assiilaton as a Crterio for the Establshet of the Text A Co parate Stdy on the ass of Passaes fro Matthe Mark ad Lke (Kampen J H Kok989



THE MORITY-TEXT THEORY: HISTORY, METHOS N CRITIQUE 197

tome takes on a major internal crterion used by eclectcs: harmonizationn the gospes. He demonstrates tat harmonizations occur in te Alexandran text76 as well as te Byzantine and goes so r as to suggest thatthere are more harmoniations at times, in soe lexandrian MSS tanthere are n te MT Wissein parts coany wit te rest of the Tcamp owever n tat e apparently alows r a Lucianic recension7and concedes that there are secondary readngs wtin the yantinetext.8

One oter sgnicant volume om MT quarters concludes my historicalsurvey 9 Growng out of the n-house deates a new MT NT was ulised in 99. By Willia G Perpont and Maurice A. Robnson80 it is aconscious reaction to the Hodges-Farstad text r t denies te vaidity ofstemmatics on a large scale and tus reinstates majority readings in te

pericope adulterae and in Reveation81 Te wor is in reality a iece ofnostagia n tat it canonizes Burgonian prnciples n reaction to the fewadvances made in MT uarters in tis century82

Ts brief historca survey reveals at least three imortant ctors toconsder in assessng the T movement The movement is extremelyconservativeot teologcaly (all subscribers are evangelcals or ndamentaists) and metodologcaly w sustantive advances have beenmade snce urgon). 2 The overarcing concern of traditional-text advocates as been to maintain the concet of provdential preservaton Tebuk of the intratraditional discussions has cused on wether the resut

ant text e the various rms of the traditonal text produced by tosewitin te camp) ars this doctrine There as been almost no critiueof method r method's sake (3) Tere ave been only a andl of bonafde textual critcs within te traditional camp Burgon deserves tis accolade because of s collation eorts 83 Hodges Wsselink and erhas vanruggen also belong here Hils is the only TR adocate o ualies as amember in the club Tus the MT movement s not a movement amongtextual critics ut a opular movement wthn conservative circles bolstered by an occasiona scholar

6Toug e cots te sae ero a tat of te MT advocaes of copang md11dual

Aeadna MSS wit te Byzatme tet-type as a wole7 Wssehk, Assimatwn 435 So aso s eto a Bugge wo goes so as to say

tat "we ca esabhs tat Luca added to te New Testaet (Ancent Text 18 n 368 Wssehk Amltwn, 89 ad pass Cf aso a Bugge's sa ocessio

Annt Txt 38 Utuaey o patiuas ae ge9 Te ost ecet oue y D A Waite Dfndg the Kg James Bzbe) cao e co

sdeed sgcat t is 339 pages of aecdotes gtyassociatio aguets ad eoogca ectives Te auto wo s te cuet pesdet o te Dea Bugo Socety agues as

sogy te KJV as e does e TR akg ee oe extee ta was Hs80 W G Pepo ad M A oso The Ne Testamnt n th Ona Grk aordg

to the Byante!Ma1rty Textom (Ataa Onga Wod 9981 Id XIV-XV

82 Id x A te sae tie te edtos epcty dsagee wt soe of Bugos aguets espeay tose of a oe teoogca atue pp )

83 Hoske woud eog ee f i wee ot s qks ews



98 JOURNL OF THE VNGEIC OGCL SOCIEY

I. PRESENT-DAY MAORITY-TEXT MTHODS

Modern-day traditional-ex avocates are agreed on thee premises.

1 Texual criicism us begin wi a eoogica a p riri-verba inspirationwit is coroay, povidenia preservation (2 Wescot an Horthave one the Cuc a geat issevice by empasizing sjective eemens in exa ciicis (vz intea cieia) o he negec of he "obective data (viz. te Greek MSS) 3 The e tex is to e und in heaorty of /yzanine textype

Wee ey isagee wi one anoe is in e exen o wic heaove poins ae ame Two broad grops can e disingised amongaitionaliss oay: TR avocates and T avocaes hese wo gropsivide especiay over e rst houg rarely on a conscious level an

hi peises Many T defeners age peservaion ust as strongyas o TR avocates wihot noicing hat to gran o pesevation the saedocinal saus as eba inspiation is o eny heir own clais heT an to a he TR84 As Ehrman as aricuate

Any cam that God preserved the New Testamet text tact g1g Hischuch actual, ot theoetca possesson of t must mea oe of theethngs-e1the 1 God peseed It a the etat manuscts so that oneo them cota any textua corrupt0ns or 2) e preserved t a group ofmanuscpts oe o whch conta ay couptons or 3 e reseed t a sotay manuscpt wh1ch aoe contas o couptns. 5

R avocates Hils Letis are the only ones wo can caim any in ofconsisency in tis rega, tey o, at eas, avocate one pinte textFo e texa criicism does no exis aer all of eir enegy is expene in apolgia, no znvestigatw. T avocaes ae unwiing to maequie suc a eisic eap, recognizing (peraps sbconsciosy to one egee or anoe tat a wolesae dense of te TR is stipped nae ae ba of logc an empiricis Wa is a sake, oo is reslts Tee ae838 dieences beween te R and he M .86 Consequenl the MT ante T groups dier in te egree to wic ey am te tird premiseT proponents ae mch more consistent in assigning vaue to te maoiy of SS87

Te T group as at pesent hee subgoups. Fist Hoges an Fasa ol to te twoege meho of satisics (pobaiiy of maorty being ig pesuaby conrmed a east in eoy, y stematics "

4 Cf J J Ray uThe writmg o te Word of Go by msprat1on is no greater 1race tanthe racle of ts preservation" (Gd Wrote Only One Bible [Jnction Cty Eye Oener, 955]04) R s A Defense of the Ma;rty Text ( D dssertaton, Cara Graate School ofTheology 985) 88 89, 4 24 ckermg, Mark 6 920 2

85 B D Ehran, New Testament Textual Crticis Quest fr Methodlogy M D thes1s,rmceton Teological Semary 98) 44

86 Seccaly etween the Marty Text1 and the 825 Oxrd edtion of te TR

7 For a dscssn of the d1erences between the TR and MT an te catns sc asr testmg texta consangmty see D B Walace The Marity Text A New ColatmgBase?, NTS 35 989 60968



TE MAORIY-EX EORY: ISTRY METODS AND CRIQUE 99

Any radng ovrwhlmngly attsted by the mauscript traitio is orlkly to origal tha its ival(s) ..(2) Fial dcisios aout t radgs ought to mad o te bass of a recostructio of teir istory the mauscript traition" 88 n practc, owver, t two legs of te

eto sta i tso I t two portos of tir text stalise oth ass of stmatcs th rsultat text as a sigcat umer of ority rags Tis pheomno is vry much at ods wt their rst

theortcal rsuppositio a as bee soewat maassg to t dtors, scally n viw of t ttl of tir dito 89 Stemmatcs wre alied oly te percpe adulterae a te pocalypse a ot placessveral miority radgs wr proucd (half of te reaigs i t per-

ope adulee an ovr 50 i Rvelation.Scod t pur Burgonas (Pckrg Pirpot Roso llow te

ajorty of MS vrtually at all costs (apparetly caus ay otr vwwould e a arot to tr tological prsumpto 90 Thir eorts ar

coscious racto to Hodges ad arstad. Thr quarrel has to o wt tstmmatc recostructios doe y te lattr two Pickrig's essay TeNae o [MT Tory s laspd amog t [Rvwers s targete atHogs s tor H rworks t stematcs r t peripe aduleraewt a staucly eraced premse tat t true rading sould avmajorty attstato at all levels 9 coclung the paer wit t ot-sosurpisg vrict tat t oigal tt is attest y a clear ajoity ofMSS. 92 Prpont and Roso xplcity aply rgonia rcis i tir

volume

93

Ty too ult Hogs a arstad r employig stematics. ct the oly ajor diercs tween the two texts ar i t passags rwhc Hodgs a arsta av word u mly tres 94 Bot Pickrig

88 Hodges ad Farsad MaJonty Text x89 The edtos d1d o acually do pnmary stemac research hemselves Rathe they eed

o ad maplated he dgs of H vo Sode r he pcope adultra (Di Shf dsNue Tstamets m her altst hbae Textgestalt [Te , Ber Aexade Dcker,

190 190 e11 , Goge Vadehoeck ud Rprech 193] 1 1486 54 717 765 adJ Schmd the pocalypse Studie zu Geshhte ds gehshe Apokalypse-ets 3 vols

Mch Karl Zk 9555 6] Semmaics were apped oy he peope adulteae ad hepocaypse The resu was ha ha o he readgs he pepe adulteae ad oer 50

Reeao wee ony eadgs90 This heolog¡ca presp0 ore expc Pckerg's wngs ha Pepo

ad Rbso deed he aer adm ha "he derlyg heologca cos take a secodaryroe he ream oexual cncsm ad ha he exadna ad Wese M ae ethe he

retical o seess Orgal Gek x) hey qcky add howeer, ha a ea ex caobe poduced o he bass of he lexada ad Weser wesses p xl) ay be addedhee ha Robso-Pepo aso expc1ly age agas a maJony readg he popadultrae oe ad oy oe sace ( 8 8 ed agug ha the comme appears o bea pae gloss om laer ado ad hisocay has bee eeced y al edors o he

Greek New Tesame p 495 Oe emped o hk ha he secod easo ge the oly

oe ha cos wh he edors, r ohewse oh 5 3b- 4, et al shod aso be athezed9 Pckerg laspheed 892 Ibd

93 Pepo ad Robso Orgial Grek x x x94 bd x 494495 her age agas semmacs IS smply ha eds o mgae

he maoy p 495



200 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICA HEOLOGAL SOCEY

and Perpont-Robinson are addressng those already commtted to the MTthoy, wthout sious ntenton to ngage i daogu wit outsids. 95

hird van Bruggen and Wisslink would hod to MT prority but notM exclusivty Theirs s te most nanced MT poston Although the donot xpict ague against paticua majoity eadngs they allowatlast in theoryr Bzantine harmonzations and corruptons This lastgroup has exhbited oe dsre to ngage n ienc scholarl debate andas pesented mo of substance in defnse of the MT thor than eitero the rst two In partcular Wisseln has producd the only sustaineddens of the Bzantn text on ntenal gounds

. A CRITQUE OF THE MAORTY-TEXT THEOR96

My citique o the MT thoy will cus on thee genal ponts: 1 thdoctrne o presevation as the theoogical presupposition behind the theory (2) the vae of the numerica superorty o the zantine SS overt Axandian o Westn and 3 the aleged subctivity of nterna!criteia in determining the txt of th N which again rsults in llngback on the "obectvty of numbes

95 P1ckerg's essay was crculated only to MaJoty Text Socety members The PierpontRobson text prodced by an nknown pubsher (Oal Word), cdes on the Jacketblurb "T1s s1cant new edt10n is the closest approx1mation yet produced to an athenticByzante/Maoty Text edt10n of the New Testaent and "[Th1s text] is a valuable and longawa1ted contbtion coents largey irrelevant to those not already pred1sposed towardte MT

96 n recent years a rather extensve teratre has been produced agast the MT theory, both ts genera tenets and any particlars (addressg e g vaous target passages patr1sticand vers1ona usage dvdua Mss, revews of MT works) Among the ore genera treatmentsare the llowg Taylor Mode Debate 1973) "Queen Anne Resurrected? A Rev1ew Arcle

JETS 2 (977 377381 Fee Modern Texta Cts and the Revval of the Textus Recep

tus (978) "Modern Textal Ct1c1sm and the MaJorty Text A ReJoder 978) TaylorQeen Anne Rev1s1ted A Reoder JETS 21978)697 ee A Critique ofW N P1ck

engs The Identity of the New Testament Text A Revew Arcle, WTJ 4 (97879) 397423Carson Kg James Versn Debate (979) Ehrman New Testament Textual Crticism (98)M W Holes, The MaJoty text debate new r of an old isse Themes 8 (983) 319R L Omanson A Perspecve on the Stdy ofthe New Testament Text BT 34983) 722J P Lew1s he Text ofthe New Testaent ResQ 27 (984 6574 H P Scanl The Maorty Text Debate Recent evelopents BT 36 (985) 364 Sh1elds Recent Attempts (985)K Aland Te Text of the Churc? Trty Journal 8 987 344 B Wallace SoeSecond Toghts on the Ma¡orty Tet," BSac 46 989) 27290 The MaJoty Text and theOral Text Are They dentica BSac 148 99 1569 T J Ralston The 'Maoty Text

and Byante Os NTS 38 (992) 2237 Wallace nsprat10n Preservat0n and NewTestaent Textual Cr1t1s Grace Theoogcal Jouna 2 992) 25 My tenton th1ssection is to rehearse ony the ma crties Also there wll be almost no treatent of the TR

vew sce 1t s as Greenlee asserted a scolary cur10sty and because there are no textal

ctics ave today to defed it or detailed teracton with 1ls v1ews per se anor hs theological presumpt0 cf Taylor Modern Debate, ee Revva! 224 Strz Byzante Text-Type

3746 Wallace Preservat10n



THE MAJORITY-TXT THOR: HISTORY METHODS AND CRTIQU 201

l. The doctrinal underpnnngs of the traditional-text teory First, andmo ipoanly, 1 mu speak to he eologc a o. MT avocaes neede doga of preevio97 t l pons wee the evdene wi no eay

ye o thei intepeao As one tradona-ext voae dmed:

When reviewing the deses of he Majoiy Tex, oe dominating cosideraion eerges: a prior comime o wha he Bible has o sa coceringitsel wih regard o ispiraio ad preserai. For he Maoriy etapoogists is is a al-consuig cosideraio o whch everythig else

mus e suordiae heir arguets therere are o directed o soe

etral ar of deteriaion (as if sch a thig existed) u are cosciousydirected o hose who also ha e he same pioriy98

To e verbal npiraion neesstte pesevaion Piering tels sha "he octne o Dvne eevaon of the New Tesaen Text e

pen upon he intepreon of te evene wc eognzes te Tadiional Tex o be e ontnuation of the ograph.99

In order o ake peservation sppo te MT ut n ceslity:Go has peeve e ex of the ew estment in a vey pue m and has been redily avalble o His llowers n evey age throughou 1900yea0º Hence he T poon ae on a corolay (cesiy) of corollry presevtion of a pacuar dogatc tace verbal nsprion.

1 menon ve oevaon n repose (1) Te drving ce ehindhi heoogical rmaon n unieetae ee cerany Thetrationa-ex lieaure s led w aserons witot ehod

ology hat ha r ts agenda he deemnaton of a connou obvoulyprovenly preerve ex we e n prncple le wt mxmnertainy . vers the maximum cetanty aored by he meodoogy h eeks povenly preeve ex01 Snce hitoia nquy no blck or we te only way o eve absole centy s hroghocin certtde 2 Ioncally as much eo s MT dvoe expendagaint jectvity an he ue of hmn eason02 thei enie doctrina

97 Most recently Wssemk deed the necess1ty of ths convct10n Soe dendes of the

Byzantme text-type ae peudced m theologca espect The sae epoach cannot be d

ected at ai dendes o that text Fo thee ae textual ctcs who dend the poty of the

Byzantme texttype on the bass o textuacrtca! arguents Ther aguents ust theeee tested" (Assimilatwn Athough he aeges that Hodges, Pckemg and van Buggen have

no theoogcal agenda the own wtmgs suggest otherwse c Hodges, Defense 8 Rat10na

s 2930 P1ckemg, Bugon 869 ak 6 920 dentity 54 van uggen AncentText 4 Bes1des Wsselmk tacty adts that the MT theory s only und aong conseva

t1ves Assmlatzon 5 I so then thee ust be ore than ee textctcal arguents that

have swayed the Why no nonconsevat1ves? he theoogcal a prii, whether stated or not

s thee

98 Lets Contug Debate 9299 Pckemg urgon 9lO bd 90101 ets Contu Deate 200 C aso ckermg ugon 88, ak 6 920 van

Bruggen nient Text 961º2 Hodges Ratonas 235 van Buggen Anient Text 3 40 P1ckemg dentity

93 R Hs Deense 83 8889 3 f y d1scuss0n on mtena evdence MT advo

cates' etcence o use hua eason



202 JOURNL OF THE VNGLICL THEOLOGCL OCITY

basis s unded o what hey hk God mus hve done. Burgon se isi moo we e sted: "Tere exss no reaso r suposig eDvne Agen, wo e s insce hus gave o ankind e Scrp

ures of ru straigwy abdcaed His oce; ook no rer cre ofHis work aadoned tose recous writngs o teir e103 ills demanded ha God mus hve done hs4-no because he Bible says sobu ecause ogic dicaes a hs mus be te case Such a sance isurged i he ce of empirca ad exegeica evidence o he corary3) his deisc rua vioaes known hsoricl da Suc a dogmaic armaio resus i rocrustenizng of e daa on a mssivesce he name of orhodoxy For exape he Byzaine ex dd nobecome a majoriy u e nnh cenury5ad eve n majoriymus e qulied here are amos wce as may Ln SS as tere are

Greek nd o my kowedge oe of he beogs o he Byznetex16 (4) hs docrn sance aso lacks a sound exegeca basis Toradiioaex advocaes if epirica da do o aury f e eorythere s sil a aven e achor of dogma Bu f tha acor is oosedom s exegeica moorngs e etre doctrna udao coapses. Inigh of hs tere are wo raer surprisig cue om rdiioaexpologiss: ay exegess of e reeva Bica exs on wich ey aseter creed covicons, and ay dscusson of how he doctrne suareswi e O ex i is curre sae Regarding he rs pon ve pssages are ycay adduced in suppor of he docrne of preservao: Ps11989 Is 40:8; Mt 517-18; Jo 1035 1 Pet 12325. Te discussos of ese pssages re remarkay acoicusuay no more amere isig of he rerences 8 or a uoaion of oe of tem somewere e nroducon or a a promien ocao9 Tradonliss make eraher cie assumpo ha wen "God's word is menoed e rerence mus e o e wre exspeccay e ex of e N Ye neher e wrie tex nor e N per se is in view n hese assages hemos satisctory exegesis of l such passges is ha hey re saeenscocernig eiher dvie etic pncpes (e mor aws ht cano e

103

Burgon, Tradztwnal Text 11104 H1ls Kmg Jaes Veswn Defended! 8105 See later d1scuss10n r ev1dence that the MT was m a morty the rst severa cen

tues AD106 Cf B M Metzger, The Eary Verswns of the Ne Testaent Thezr Orgm, Transzsswn

and Lzztatwns (Oxrd Carendon 977) 359 r a d1scuss10n of the textua ates of the

Lat Mss107 The on stud of an ength m ct of whch I am aware is D L Brake "The Preserva

on of the Scptures Countefeit or Genue ed Fuer) 17528 Ths essay s a mod1ca

on of Brake The Doctrne of the Peservat1on of the Scrptres Th M thes1s Dalas

Semary 970 Unrtunatey the entre work tracs e1segess108 E g P1ckerg dentzt 153 Wate prov1des an terestg except10n He devotes ten

pages of d1scuss10n pp 5 o the reevan passages under the sect0n headg God Prom-

sed Bbe Preservat1n Defendg the Kmg Jaes Bzbe But as much matera as Wa1e devotes to th1s subject there s no exeges1s on assumpt1n and homy

109 E g Hodges and Farstad Ma¡ot Te v



THE MJORITY-TEXT THEOR: HISTORY, METHOS N CITQUE 203

violated without soe kind of consequences) or the promise of edprophecy.11° Further, eve if these proof texts rerre to the writte textit woud be to the OT text, not the NT111 Regardig the second point, inspite of the ct that eve though many coservative opponents of the MT/R vew ebrace soe doctrine of preservation112 (no doubt iuenced bythe Westster Conssio113 this doctrine canot be appied to the OTIt is deonstrabe that the OT text does not eet the criteria of preservation by ajority rule-nor in ct, of presevatio at all in soe paces A

number of readigs that ony occur i versions or are und ony i one ortwo eary Quran MSS have inisputabe caim to authenticity overagaist the errant maority114 Moreover in many paces all the extantwitesses are so corrupt that coectura emedatio has to be empoye115 Signicanty any but not a such conectures have bee vin

dicate by the discovery of the Dead ea scros16 Hence because of the

O "he Scnpture caot be broke (oh 10 35 m 1ts cotext, eas a w1 be edor al of1t 1s true rather tha we ust have every word preserved Not oe JOt or t1tte othe law w1l pass away uti a 1s le (Matt 5 18 pamly rers e1ther to the eth1ca prmc1pes o the aw or the let o prophecy or both Ether way the idea o preservao othe wrtte text 1s quite re1g to the cotext For a ore extes1ve treatet of these passages see Waace Preservato 4243

11 Brake Preservat1o sts Ps 19 89 Isa 40 8 Matt 5 1718 oh 10 35 Pet 2325ccasoay Matt 24 35 is use to support preseratio Eve though ths text has the advatage ofrerrg to esus' wors as oppose to the T) the cotext lS ceary eschatologica adthus the wors o esus have certamty ofet hat the text oes ot ea that h1s wordsw1l a be preserve m wr1tte r is obv1ous o two cts

1Such a vew ot oy s re1g

to the cotext but so pes that the wntte gospes were coceive at th1s stage m Hezlsge-

schichte, ecaes bere a ee r the was apparety t 2 we certamy o ot have a oesus wors recored-eve o a ost coservave mterpretao ofthe ata-e1ther m Scnpture or esewhere (c oh 20 30 21 35

12 Cf ayor Modern Debate 148 154 163 Sturz Byantzne Text Tpe 374913 he Westmster Coss10 1646 was the rst creea stateet to mclue the octne

of preservato owe shorty by the Heetc Cosesus Forua 1675 Both were teeapparety to caoze the R m the ce of Roa Cathoc hostty he octne was prootedheavy by oh we Cf Let1s zs's Contrbuton 2224 3570 (esp 36 4751 63

14 Cf the deostrat10s to ths eect m D Bartheey Critque Textuell de lAncien Testamen 2 saie Jeremie Lamentatwn� (Gottmge Vaehoec ud Ruprecht 1986 361362(sa 49 12 43407 53 1 E Wurthwem Text of the Old Testament Gra Raps Eerd

as 1979 1611 Saers The Dead Sea Psams Scroll (thaca Core Uversty967 7 E ov The Text Crtcal Use of the Septuagznt zn Bzlca Reseah erusale 81or 198 7072 288306 W H Browee The Meanzng of the Qumran Scrols for the Ble

(New Yor xr Uversty 1964 216235 G Veres The Dead Sea Scrolls Qumran

Perspecte rev e Phiaepha Fortress 977 23209 F M Cross The Ancient Lrary

of Qumran and Modern Bca Studies Gare C1ty Doubeay 1958 169 189 19115 E g Keey a coservatve who evertheless coud wnte a et1re boo o the

uts of the Masoret1c ext (An Ad to the Textua Amendment of the Od Testament [Edm burgh a Car 1928] Browee Meanzng 23 o sa 53 1 R W Kem Textua

Ctcsm of the Od Testament The Septuagznt after Quman (Ph1aepha Fortress 1974 76o 1 Sa 4 47 Wurthwem Text 18 o er 2 21 D M Fouts " Suggest0 r Isa1ahXV 16" VT 41 1991 472474 E C Urch The Qumran Text f Samuel and Josephus (Mssoua Schoars 1978 193221

6 nh Samue 2 Cross, brar 189 o 2 Sa 24 6 Wurthwe Text 142 Q Isa 4 61 Bartheey Crtque 361362 o 49 12 53 J, Browlee Meang 218219 o 11 621 8 225226 o 49 2 226233 o 53 1



04 JURNL F H VNLCL LCL SCY

necessity of conjectural emendation the octrine of preservaton is inapplcabe r te OT-a ct at, roncay llusrates een more boldy thelegitmacy of he proof texts use r his doctrine r tey all refer tohe OT. (5) In ight of te empirical an exegetical evience tradionalext champons and oter eangelcals who arm provential preservaton need to reexamne ther belefs r at present they are guity of a blological double sanar uned on an improbale exegess of thereevant assages7

In sum a theologcal p has no place in textal crticism Sncehs s the case it s necessary to lay ase desm n dealng wth the evdence he quesion snce we are ealng ndamenaly wth hstorcalnquiry is not what is possible b wha s probable With te th stanceof the tratonaists n lace textal crtcism ecomes so ntertwned

wt orooxy tat he evence cannot be obecely interpreted Bonce dogma is evacate om the scussion no posion can be comrable erely wth what s ossbe. Hence I now turn to two strans of evdence by which we mst examne the MT theory-strans that I elieerender the theory improbable

2. E v radtonally the strongest argument n the Mheory as ts name mples s the case om nmers n te words ofHodges and Farsta: "Any readng overwhelmingly aested y the manuscrp tradton s more lkely to be orignal than is rval(s)18 In other

words the reaing spported y a maorty ofSS

is he orgnal

119Hort iseven broug to the wtness stan n spport of ths conention A heo

recal presption need remains that a majority of extant ocuents ismore likely to represent a maorty of ancestral ocuments at each stage of

117 For a more complete anaysis of this doctre as wel as of the use MT proponents aremakg of spraion and errancy see Waace, "Preservatn 2-5

8 Hodges and Farstad Ma1ority Text x9 P1ckerg has recenty charged me w1th msunderstandg te MT theory irst he as

serted that the method was much more complex than merey countg noses (ecture given atDalas Semary February 2 190 Second he pots ou ta te word 'overwhemg is cruca wen speakg of maJoy (Pickerg, "More Second Tougts on te Maoy Tex A Re

view Arice [unpubsed paper crcuated o members of the Maoty Text Soc1ety n d] 3) Inoter words e MT heory does not rest on a mere maJoriy but on an overwhemg maoriy

(ibd n response 1 MT advocates constanty appea to numbers as the pmary evidena(as opposed o theoogica bass r eir view cf Pckerg Idenity Appendx C 5969whic is essentiay a dupcaon of Hodges Defense 49 van Bruggen, Ancient Text, cap 2The Vaue of he Number of Manuscpts pp 121] Perpon and Robson, Original Greekxvxx Borand "Reexamg 504 506 n parcuar if s is not Pickengs basic approach wy does he u Hodges and arsad eir semmac reconstctons precisey because e resuant ex is not und the maJority ofMSS (Pickeng More Second Tougts2 4 Baspemed ? Tus i seems Pckeng as consed method with raionae The rationae r the MT may be compex but he method r most MT denders s quite simpe Countnoses 2 To dend the MT theory on he bass of overwhemg maJorty puts e teory oneven shakier round r where there s not an overwemg aotyas s true hundreds of

imes the T cf e g Pckerg More Second Toughts 2 Aand "Text of te urc363 commentg on 2 or 67a noes at the MT spts 52 mesM denders mustresort to terna evidence Yet by teir own admssion terna evidence s woy subective



THE MAJORITYTEXT THEORY: HSTOY METHOS AN CTUE 205

transmissio tha ice versa"1 This lie is a vorte of MT advocates.Hoges r example quotes it often21 with the omment that eve thsreat oponet of the majority rm had to admt" the resmptio of the

maorty beg right22 Wat oges ls to mentio, owever, s tatHor mmeatey adds But the resmptio s too mte to wegagast the smaest tangibe evdee o other kds"23 ad that Brgoncoee the ooste resmto: hat deed of two anciet docmetste more aient migt not nreasoay have been exete to rove themore trstworthy I am ot cocerned to diste ad wi ot here dscsssuh a qeston; bt the roaities of the ase at al events are ot axioat24 Wen uron mae ts statement ony oe N apys was kown to exst Now almost oe hndred NT ayri have ee scovere-oe o whh low the Byzantie text rm In ght of su ev

ence f oe were to argue r ateceet robaty oe wo have tosay that dismissal of these early wtesses costittes otig ess than awoesae rejetio of roaities o a sweeng sae"25

short in storia investgaton statistica roability s amostaways worthless eseialy whe ased o awed assumtions2 Anone of evdee s wort a pon of resmpto. f the MT vew s to beentertaned the Byzate text shoud e wdely iused n te earestGreek M versons and Chrch thers But te oposte stato otasas te owg onsderatos mae ear

First among te Greek M wat s today the majorty id ot becomea maority ti te t centry ct as r as te extat wtessesreveal, the M d ot exist te rst ur etues Te evdee s portraye in the chart o page 206.

Te mootonosy typca response to tis by tratonatext avoatess tat te eary Byzatie MSS mst ave ee reognze r ter vaean worn otan argment tat goes bac to Brgo27 Tey insist ontis ease tere seems to e o other way to expa how eghty ercet

2º Westcott and Hort ntroductwn 452 Hodges, Defense 4 "Response 14 "SurreJomder 1 C also W1ssemk Assimilatwn

8-19 Pierpont and Robmson Ogina Greek xx22

Hodges, "Surreomder 123 Westcott and Hort ntroductwn 45 Ths ct was rcey pomted out by Fee "Reom

der 55824 Brgon Traditwna Text 8 cf aso 4-425 Qotmg Hodges Defense 9, who ses th1s argent on beha o the MT My pomt

that stasca probabtes tend to cance each other ot and are thus hardly an appropr1ate

ethod o hstorca mvesgaton26 One o the assptons o the statscal ode that a good readmg Ut as key to

coe o aad readmg as the reerse (Hodges Defense 5) th1s not the case then the

entire statistica ode does not appy statstan D odges m bd 7) Bt the eates o

a theoog1co-terary docent are ndaentay opposed to the process owmg m both drec

tions C B M Metzger "Trends m te Textua Ctc1s of the Iad and the Mahabharata

Chapters m the History o Ne Testament Textua Ctcsm NTTS 4 Grand Rapds Eerd

ans 963) 142

15427 Brgon Traditwna Text 2 Hodges Defense 45 Pckermg Identit 129-134 , W1s

selmk ssimiatwn 3536



206 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGEICA THEOOA SOIETY

Distributwn of Greek MSS by Century and Text-Type

Century

IX

VIII

VII

VI

V

IV

III11

Alexandran Western Byzantne

1of the extant MSS coud derive om the autographs and yet leave bend notangble evdence among the srvvng wtnesses of the st r centures.But ths argument rases severa! qestons f the Byzantne M wore out,wat s to explan how they became te majorty om the nnth centuryon? On MT reckonng, the rea maorty shold never e nd as an extantmajorty Further, what s to exlan ther complete nonexstence berethe late urth century? Are we to suppose that every sngle "good NTsomehow wasted away-that no hstorcal accdent could ave preservedeven one om the rst 350 years he uant analoy that a used Bbegets worn out mght work n ndvdual cases But to argue ths on a gandscale stretches the credblty of the theory r eyond the reang pontFurther how s t possible that a workedover M wth many correctonssuch as Snatcus sustantates te vanshng theory Ths was ovousya used MS, yet Pckerng arues that to demand that a S survve r 100

years s n eect to reure that t have remaned unused28 Why snothng mentoned aout the myrad of Byzantne M that although they

ave ovousy devaed om ther arcetype, go uncorrected? Many schmedieval Byzantne M were evdently not used29 And woud we not expect to see at least soe early papy (let aone a maoty of them) wth adstnctvey Byzantne text rm?º It wl not do to say that all the early

128 Pckeng, ldentzy 9129 Th1s is ev1de o ayoe who has examed hese rshad or va cs1me r ot

oly are o-Byzate readgs equey ud m hem bu aso umerous ad subsaaosese readgs are ef tac The rce o my argme s mucee O he oe had maes P1ckerg's mpc1 coecto bewee a uused ad a corru backre Othe oher had f umerous Byzae were uused aer ceunes he her oex1s

ece he eary ceunes s all he more called o queso I gh o h1s oe woders how may o he Byzae he MT avocaes hae realy examed

130 Tra10alex aoaes equey make hyperboc clams abou Byzae readgsud the apy basg such saemes o Sturzs work (c Hodges Defese 4 P1ckerg



HE AORIY-EX HEORY: HSORY EHOD N CQUE 20

papyn represet the loca text of Egypt because every text-type 1s apparety d i te papyriecept the Byzatie.3 Tis "vaisig ypotess is cleary a case of pw pncp ad as sc masks te ct

tat the MT teory is at bottom theologcaly ovate32e etre arget o statstica probabiity ot oy s te

eary cetres We the actal Byzate ss are eamedot jstcotedsoe distrbg cts srce I a recet sty of severa Byzatie m Lke r exampe, Tmoty J. Rasto coclde:

Hodges' statistical model which es at the heat of the Maoity Text teorydemands tat a texttype becomes less homogeneous ove tme as te cumuatve eect of scbal errors and emendatons are transm1tted subsequentgenerations o manuscpts Ths eect obsered among the Alexandanmanuscpts o ts study Howee te case IS eesed r te Byzante

manuscrpts, wc gow more omogeneous ove time deng odges statstca presupposition In addit0n odges argment om stemmatics

damaged by this conatn o Fees long-eld hypothess that te ate Byzante wtnesses bear a cose esembance to eac ote tan to the o1alByzante achetype 33

ldentzty 76-, Wssemk Assimaton 3234 P1erpon and Robmson Orgna Greek xxvxxv) Hodges agues exaple ha "f he pesen ae of d1scovey conues we ay ea

ably anicpate e evenua aesa0n of neay evey MaJoy eadmg anuscps wen ong bee Aeph and B wee even coped (Defene 4) Acualy at he pesen ae swoud ake aos hee enaassug hat a Byzane eadgs coud be und m hepapy Furteoe e evdence tha Stuz pesens is subec to hee ccss ( Many o

s eadgs have subsana suppot fo ote extypes and ae t us no dsmcivey Byzane (2 the exsence of a Byzane eadg eay papyi does no pove he exstence ofe Byzanme exype eay papy 3) wehe he ageeens ae geneicay sgcano accidena is oveooked even Wssek ads ha a nube of he ae eey accidena[maton 33 In y exaa0n of Suz's s und ony eg Byzanepapyusagnens ha seeed o be geneicay scan Of hese sx wee no dsctvey Byzane Luke 0 2 3 34 5 2 ohn 0 38 9 ) Suzs bes case was h 4 eoss0n of ou theou)- eadg adoped NA26!UBSGNT3 4 When hese fcos ae aken

o account e papyusByzanme aeeens becoe an msucen base e concus0nsha ehe Suz o e T advocaes bd fo

3 T advocaes epeaedly conse geoapy wth exua aties assug ta a M

und m Eyp us be Aexandan caace cf Hodges and Fasad Ma1ot ext xxTs baandswc aneuve conceas e papable weakness m te aguen Te auen

sues at othe eves oo f he eay papy epesent one exype en why do hey ackooeney a po tha T poponens cap on? One cannot have boh ways The lackof ooeneity pes ta ey ae peecens0na On te T eoy a peecens10na papyus coud no be consc0usy anByzane Wy then does e Byzantme exype no sow up m he 2 f he Byzane tex s lackm epesenaton m he Egypian wnesses owcan MT chapons ague at Gd has peseved te ext of e New Tesaen a vey pue and t has been eadly avaiable to s owes evey age and a e sae e caat te Eyptan wtnesses wee bone m a sewe pipe ckem uon 90 , 93?

32 Cf e g Wsselnks ahe weak defense of hs (Assmaton 36 33 Rason The 'Maot et" 3334 Accod o Rason wok done owad s

D d1sseaion povsonaly wh the sae tie as he atice and o be copeed e 99at Daas Seay codces 2322 2 cenuy and 83 t centuy) ae the eaes M ke to have a h aeeent 98% w he wo pted ed0ns of e MT Scany boh

ae Kr M wc aon othe ns s a gly eded oup and ceay poduced aspecc econay pupose Raston coespondence uy 1, 993 f aso O Voss s vonSodens K' a snc Type of Tex JBL 57 [938] 338 F Wsse he Poe Metho Cassg an Evauatg Manscpt Evence [S 4 Gand Rapds Eedans, 982] 92 )



208 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGEICA HOOAL OETY

Ralston's and other studes strongy suggest that the Hodges-Farstad andPerpontRobiso texts not ony do not represet the origina but do noteve represent the Byzantne text of the rst mieium. Indeed there is

evidence that the specic text rm und in these printed edtons was notn a majorty of Greek ss uti the teenth century134

Secod, if the Gree do ot attest to the MT what about the versons? The evidence amassed to date s tht there are no versons of theByzantne text-type unti the Gothc at the end o the urth century35

This eeds to be aaced by the ct that the Coptc Ethopic Ltí dSyriac versons al antedte the urth century ad come om varous regions around the Medterranean Nether their texts or ther locaes arestrcty Egyptia Ad even f one of these ery versos had bee asedon the Byzantine text this woud oy prove that this text exsted ere

the urth cetury t s qute other thg to assume that t was n theajorty bere the urth century

Thrd the evdece s smar i the Church thers36 Three refpoits are order regardg the ptrstc evdece 1 So r as 1 amware the ast eghty years every crtica! study on patristc usage hascocuded that the M was never the text used by the Church thers nthe rst three cetures. Fee recogzed as oe of the eadg patrstc authortes today wrote:

Over he past e1gh years I have been coecmg the Geek pastc edence

r Lue and John r he nerna0na Greek New Tesaen Proec. n all

of hs ateal have und one mvariae a good cca edn of a her'sex, or he dscovery of eary MSS, always oves he hers ex of he Taway fm he TR an closer to he ex of our oe ctca edt0ns37

(2) Though soe of the thers o the rst three ceturies had isotedByztine readigs the eriest Church ther to use the yzatie textwas the heretic Asterius a urthcetury writer38 om Atioch and oe

Yet the staistical argument of the MT theory as sumes creased randomness, not creasedurmity In Ralston's sudy, no distcbve readgs are und hs group assimiates

other readgs apparenty through a consc0us editoal and turgca process Further vonSoden notes hat he K group, which was a moty among the Byzante MSS the welfthcentury predomated y he teent "Denn s XI mi 30 de Evv enthatenden Handschfen ilden die K-Codd nur een /0 s XV mt 265 schon eahe /3 s XV m1t

26 eahe /2 der Gesamtprodukt10n n s X sd es nur 9 unter 306 andschfen(Schriften 2 763)

134 See prev10us noe and the comment y von Soden I w1sh to give cred1t to Ralson rpotg me o von Sodens comment as wel as makg the connect0n etween he K group

and the Ma1ty Txt

135 For a d1scuss0n of te versona evdence see Walace MaJoty ext and Oa ex

6062136 For an extended d1scuss1on of the patrst1c evdence see i1d 6266137 Fee Revva] 26 Fees op10n has not changed feen years as is eviden y hs re

peatg the staement the revon of his arbe ( D Fee, he Maoty ex and he

ral ext of the New Testamen Studis n th Tho and Mthod f Nw Tstamnt Tul Ctcm [ed E J Epp and G D Fee rand Rapids Eerdmans, 3] 6 n 8

38 See Aand Text of te hurch?



THE MAJORIT-EXT HEOR: HISOR, MEHODS AND CRQUE 209

of Lucian's students. 139 (3) The patristic evidence is also vaabe in anoher way On severa! occasons atristic wres do more than quote thetext They also discss extual varants Holmes pons out that

al pf that the mauscripts kow today d ot accuratey epresent thestate o aais i ealie cetuies coes m patstic eeeces t vaiats oce widey kow but u today i ly a w o eve o witesses.The "lge endig o Mak, 16:9-20 today is u i a lage majoity oGee mauscts; yet accodig to Jeoe it is et wth i ly a wcpies o the Gospelalst al the codices o Geece beig witout this assage Slay at Mattew 5 e otes tat ost te acet ciesdo t cotai te quaicatio wthout case whic, wee, s ui the eat ajoity today4º

The combned testimony of te externa! evidence-the ony evidence

tha the MT defenders consders that the Byzanine text aparentydi not exis the rst hee cetuies he Geek MSS versions and

Church thers provide a threed cord not easily boken o be sure, iso

laed Byzantine readings have been locatedbu not he Byzantnetext141 here is simpy no she o evidence that the yzantine texttyeexised pior to he rth century 142

Ou scussion o he externa evience wod no be comlee whout awod on the potential value of the Byzantne wnesses. Even ithin theamework of reasoned ecectcism it s theoreticay possibe to embrace a

139 Alhog MT advocaes dob ha he orthodox Chysosom wold have sed he tex ofLc1an, a hee1c (cf P1ckerg Identity 9596) s is no moe supsg an ha MaLe wold se he ex of Erasms

4º Hoes "he 'MaJoy ext debae 17 For exapes c B M Mezger Parstc Ev1-dence and the exa C1c1sm ohe New esamen NTS18 (1972 394 00 Expc1t Refeences e Woks o Oigen o Vaan Readgs he New esamen Mansc1psHistocal and Litera Studies Pagan Jewish and Christan (Leiden Bll, 1968 88103S eomes Expci Reences o Vaan Readgs Manscr1ps of e New esamenNw Testament Studies Phoogical Vesnal, and Pasti (Leiden Brll 1980 199210

14 he derence between a eadg and a extype s he deence between a paicavaan and a paern of vaaion o example althog both the NIV and KV ave dencawodg ohn 11 he paern of vaa10n o he NV und over a wole paragaph w

d1e om he KV No one wold ague ha a handwr1en copy of ohn11 ome AD

17 5was aken o he NVeven hough s wordg wod be iden1cal wth e wodg o heNV ha vese Ye th1s s the same kd o argmen a MT defendes u se he pm11veness of he Byzane ex Smply becase solaed Byzane eadgs ae und berete cenry is no argmen a he Byzane ex exsed bee e urh cenry hey have consed eadg wih ex

142 he compellg nae o s ev1dence as caused soe MT advocaes o ecogze hahe Byzane ex-type was podced a corner As Homes pos o wle i s re haabou 90% o exant [Geek] manscps are o Byzante carace 1 is aso ue a abo 90 were wen afe he esc10n o ee o bas1caly he connes o Byzanm TheMaJoty ex debae 7 see pp 1617 a sccc summay of he ransm1ssonal hsoryhat broug abou he M) Perpont and Robson Ogial Geek xxxxxx1 agee wh h1sassessent as does Wssek Assmlan 22 and R H1lls Defese 85 86 Bu all 1s 1s to

deny nomal ransmsson as well as access1bywo plars o he MT eoy Th1s ecenconcess1on aso berays an ay ese M camp1ns have wh he R vew B sead ofErasms as he esore of he ogal tex ey have Consane



210 JORL OF HE EVELIC HEOOCL OCEY

small numbe of distnctvely Byzantne eangs as authentc. Ths oor sopen ecase no artgh arument agans evey Byzanne eadng has eenrouced To e ae o segar completely all Byzantne eadngs equies

oof of at least one of the owng: that ony extant non-Byzantne Msan ehin he ogns of the Byzanne tex m; 2 hat he bes epresenaves ofthe early texttypes ae sill exant o (3) hat he nerna evdence agans Byzantne eangs, n evey case is qute conclusve Butnone of hese thee ponts has yet een rove Fs t s well known hatHots mous genealoical argumen hat deonstrate tha the Byzaninetex was seconay was ot ased on actua Ms13 Sce ot not showspecically tat extan Aexandian an Wesen wtnesses wee the onyM emloye n the proucton of the Byzantine ext he coul no legitmatey ake e claim that the Byzantne ext ay e comletely set

ase1

4Second s an ovos ct that the es exant epesentatves ofthe vaous textypes ae not enica wth the est epresenatves of al

tme Coex Canabigenss exaple, hogh s he best extan epresentatve of he Wesen text s hghy osyncaic Even Coex Snacusone of the wo bes epresentatves ofthe lexanrian text s Wesern in hest eght chapters of John45 Hence Ho's emonsaon that the Byzantne ext s seconay s not an adequae asis o sega eve Byzanineeang since the Byzantne archetype(s) coul have een ased in a onete Alexanran an Wesen M han ae now exant h a w ofthe stnctvey Byzantne eangs have scen ntena} ceentals obe cosee auetc as even one of e etos of the UBSGT4 hasaged46

If the Byzantne text is an edite text n the recton of harmonizatons, conatons an smoothe and longe eadngs, then we mus askwhy t is not always ths way he Majority Text, example has 657shote readings than the NA2. Not all of these can e easly scounteon the bass of nena ciea Ex hypohs soe may well e ue o heuse of ette Alexanian and Wesen M n he Byzanne egion hanare extant toay Neverheess n ght of he oo creentials of the Byzanne text on emonstrae exenal grounds viz no evdence sexsence in he s hree cenes o age he authencty of

a Byzantne eang n any gven nstance needs compelng ntena!evence on ts se

143 Cf E C Colwel, "Genealogica Method Is Achevemets and ts Limtatons Studiesm Mehoology m Texal Cncm of he New Teame (Leden Bl 199 6383

This also coud no be demonsraed oday he simpe eason tat tee ae noenough pre-hcenury MSS extant even o cove he whoe NT

5 C G D Fee Codex Saicus he Gospel o John A Contbt10n o Methodoogy stabshg Texual Reat1nships NTS 5 19689 234

6 C J Kaav1dopouos MEpum; :voµs racis TOU KKAClIK ttvo S aV

�1a0J." Delo blko Meleo 13 984 3640 He cals such eadgs Easen NonIntepoa1ns It 1s perhaps Karavidopouos' uence hat has changed the atg o he

Byzane shoe eadg Phil 4 rom a "D o a B UBSGNT4



THE MAJORTY-TXT TORY: HSTORY, MTHODS AND CRTQU 21

3. Interna[ evidence.147 MT denders are usaly adamant about thewholesale sbjectivity of nterna evdence They argue that "all such generalzations [of scrial habits] tend to cancel eac other out. 148 To say tatinternal crteria are sbjectve has a p side: External evdence is alegedlyobjective But n reality all MSS are corrpt-although they are not equalyso. And that nterna! evidence can be sbective <oes not mean that t s alleay sbectve Reasoned ecectcsm mantans that several canons ofinterna evidence are objectively veriable,49 or vrtualy so And wherethey are te T amost always has an nror readng150

Traditionalsts appeal to externa evidencespecicaly nbersbecase this is the ony basis on whch they can nd certanty Many ofthem deny the egitmacy o interna! critera eca use sch a metod smltaneousy elevates man reason and denies ter doctrinal position151

he author of a recet dssertation dendng the MT trimphantly and repeatedly asserts that this vew reqres r wer textual decisions on thepart of the indvida crtic and thus less subjectivity and ess dependenceuo huan reso52 Agaist ths wt Gnte Zut every reasoedeclectic recognes that at every stage te crtc has to se his brainsWere it derent we could put a critca! slide rue nto the ands o anyol and leave it to hm to settle te problems of the New Testamenttext153 nt's point paces n bold relef a nmer of (someties nstated) assumptios behnd the MT theory-namely (1) that the books ofte NT were revered as Scriptre as soon as they were penned and hence

147 For a more extended d1scuss1on see Waace "Maor1y Tex and Ogal Tex 6669148 Hodges Defense 16 Cf also P1ckerg The basc dec1ency, boh ndamena and se

os of any characezat10n based upon sbJect1ve ctera tha he res is ony op0n i

s no obec1vey veable (ldentity 93149 See Holmes "The 'aJory ex debae 1715º W1ssek se ou o prove hat te Byzane ex-ype had Jus as good credentias as

he Alexandan In he end e conceded The degree of ass1milaons B and P45 s sk

gly sma Amaton 87 "The nmber of d1ssma0ns P75 is propor10naely some

wha greaer han he nmber of d1ssmaons he Byzane manuscps p 89 n 2 And

aough Wssen adm1s he equen harmoza10ns the Byzane ex he s s1sts

ha "he phenomenon of ass1mla10n cannot be sed o d1sm1ss he Byzane manscr1ps as

secondary p 91 One of the weanesses he sudy is he compason of dvda Alexandan M wth e Byzane tex as dsplayed he HodgesFarsad ex) All extua crs

wold adm1 tha ass1mla1on occurs across he board bu occurs he Byzane M as a

whole r more eqeny han does he Aexandran M as a whole Frher i occurs

dv1da Byane M r more eqeny han dv1dua Alexandan M151 To be appauded are wo recen wors w1c ernal cera are employed on behaf

of he MT tex W1sselk Amation see or criqe he prevous note and pass1m and

P el The Sory of ess and he Adleress (ohn 75381 Recons1dered Bb 721991 829 (see my criqe "Reconsdeng The Sory of ess and he Aderess

Reconsdered NTS 39 1993 290296 Alhogh s unclear wheer Hel is a MT advocae

he only exerna! "argumen he g1ves is an appeal o he MT "Sory 19152 R Hlls Defene 13 cf also 83 25 and pass1m So enrenched lS 1ls 1s desc

sance hat he embraces e MT heory even ogh h1s iew "1mposes 1mposs1be stras on

or maa10n Defene 89153 G Zun The Text of the Epite A Diquiition upon the orpus Panum (London

Oxrd Uvers1y 1953 12



212 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICA THEOLOGCAL SOCETY

must have been copied carelly;154 2 a the sole otive of ost scribesin copyng e NT was to preserve wha was oiginally wrien55 and(3) a, in oder statisical poabiliies o wok (and in ode intena! evidence to e worhless a good reading is js as liely o coefrom a ad reading as vc vra.156 Al such asspions are demostra ly unre57 aking internal evidence a necessary pat of esponsibletexual criticism.

Ionically although MT theoriss want objecivity and cerainy eventhey cannot avoid aking decisions on intena grouns r there arehundreds of splis in e Byzanine text where no clear ajoiy eegesAland d 52 varians wihi e MT in te space of wo verses15 nsuch cases how are MT avocates o decide wa is original? t will not doo say at these sps are no exegetically sign:cant The Byzantine

acre ove chomchm n Rom 5: is a case in point If e canonsof inernal evidence are "deonstrably llacios159 ten in several hundred places-any of e sgican-s eory s wot a soltionand wiou ceainy

How o MT dendes proceed i sc a case? "Whee a ajoiy eading does not exis we ae obliged to use a inoy reading and defend oucoce as est we may60 t witout any kin of guideines e eot ecoes weasome and stating 161 MT propoes' ustraion i succases is especially coponded bo because they have ejece he stanard canos of inerna citicis an ecause whaever canons ey useare y heir own admission wolly sujective Ta they ave no deveoped anytig tat reseles ienal canons s a acit admission hahey have no coneplaed thei own views eyond e hoizon of a deisic apologec162

Freore if internal creria ae wolly sbjecive, en MT advocates soul be abe easily o dend M reaings and give pausible reasons r such readings am To e sue they do dend an occasonareadng ere o ee ut here is no largescale eot to interac wit teinrinsic and transcriptional evidence This oo is a tacit adission hathe taditional ex really s indensible on internal grouds whic intun is a concession ha inenal evidence is no altogee sujective

154 Pickeng ldentity 9110155 Th1s s urged m sp1te of he evdece that urg1cal ad ter mueces were at work156 Hodges, Defense 6l57 C e g Fee "Crtique, Walace Seod Tougts 2022158 Alad Text of te Curc 136137 coetmg o 2 Co 1 67 Ee P1ckermg ad-

1s te probe (More 'Secod Tougts 2 ldentity 150)159 Pckerg ldentity 17160 Pckerg "Baspeed 1161 1d 8162

Hodges ad arstad are of course ecept1os to t1s md1ctet u as we have seeher appcatos of tera caos resuted sores of or1ty readgs



THE MAJORITYTEXT HEORY: HISTORY, METHODS ND CRIIQUE 23

In sum, the MT theoy's tenet that intenal citeia ae wholy subjectivenot ony makes unwaanted assumptions about the objectivity of extenaevience but aso backes in those paces where thee is no majoity text.hat thee is litte witten om MT quates on textua obems invovinga split in the Byzantine text unmasks the ndamentaly ogmatic natueof the theoy, r they have not gaped with the issues where doctrines sient

IV. CONCLUSON

In stoca investigation one ooks a pobabe econstuction on thebasis of avaiable eviece-both extena and ntena ee is always aegee of doubt a eement of subjectivity ut this does not give us theght to epace te obabe with the ossibe Any appoach that does sois oeatg within the constaints ofan a priori Yet as we have seen theoctnal a priori of the taditionaists is both bbioogicay sczohenic( t does not wok the OT) and without a ecent exegetca basisStppe of ths estic stance the taitioaltext teory is just bareywthn te eam o histocal possibilty

V EPIOGUE

1 cocue tis essay with a rl challenge to my rme mentos,Athu L. Fastad and Zane C Hodges as wel as to my low evangeicas who embace te taditiona text Fist in ode to gain cedibilty inN scolasip at lage you must demostate tat the taditionaltexthypothesis is not based in its esent iteation on an a priori assumtionAs much evdence as yo poduce on behafofyou view the nagging questio tat eses to go away is: s the teory pobabe? Does it ave aeasonabe histoica basis Can the data eay be explained adequatelyo ths theoy That tee ae, to my knoedge no nonconsevatives whoembace the is a tacit idication that the ontheoogica aguments onbehaf of the theoy i to convince At bottomwethe stated o not

pesuasion to te vie seems timatey to deed o a pior doctalconvctio ut f a theoogcal a priori has no place n textua citicsm oif you claim that the teoy can stand without adheence to one then whyae al MT eders consevative Fute, y do yo costanty solcitspport among cosevatives by te use of theoogica "scae tactics? 163

163 nerrancy and preseration are mcreasmgly held m ont of the ebers o the MaJoty

Text Socety as vtal to the v1ew C Pckerg "Mark 16 9-0" (where the sole arguet s heo

logicaD, Maoty Text Socety brochure entitled What 1s the Maoty ex Socety (n d ) m

wc the as1c ptch r potena eber8 5 heologcal Borland wo e88enaly arge8 thatte text-ctica theory that be8t ar8 an errant text 8 the one to llow ("Re-exammg

Far8tad receny ook the doctral appeal to a arge lay aud1ence argmg that o8 oderntran8lat0ns are theoogcally corrupt even to the pomt o og te re8rrec10n m Mark 16



214 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGEICA THEOOGCAL SOCIETY

Second, den the nterna! pausibility of MT reangs wth sores ofsgnicant examles. Sow tat suc reangs ave at east a odicu ofcoeng rce Indee the major eseratu r te M teory s teproducton of a textua coentary were reaings are dened bot externay an nternaly-a eseratu cae r by one of your own164

hird ubis in te trade journals Daogue with te rest of us not just wth yourseves Tere are two aspects to ts request 1 Make asubstantive contributon to our e wtout arping on your teoretcaagenda There is muc work to be one in te Byzantine mnuscues Prouce stues on varous Byantine MSS (tere as been enoug KB basng) r ony n ts way can you see the Byzantne text n its proper ligtArguments that copare indivua Aexandran SS wth te Byzantnetext as a whoe65 are as irreevant an ilogca as te ueston "s it hot

ter n Arzona or in te summer? Ony by coatng indvua ByzantneMSS can you rid yourseves of seeing the Byzantine text in a gowingy coposte lgt M campons of a peope soud be ost intereste in tiswork Yet surprsingy few f any M advocates worked on te Internationa Greek New estaent Project r Luke It is not too late to end aan on Jon (2) Once you ave compete ths apprentces then youmigt gan a earing r your views Ony then should you roote yourviews n te standard acaemc rums

Finay do not aow te intene results to be your utmate gue onot be so staunchy efensve of majorty readings Even on a statistica

bass it s possibe r te ajorty aways to be rgt To argue tsway-or at east to be rather vague about MT corruptonsrejuces youo the start and gves your entire eneavor an aateursh hue One isremned of an anaogous comment mae by Herbert Youte the eminentpayroogst:

t was Wham Jaes "wo dened te d1erence between te prossonal

and te amateur by sag tat te atter terests msef especay terest obtaed te rmer te way wc e obtas t It is a wse a-

yrologst wo decdes to take te pross10na alternatve r tere are

many wo can se resuts once tey ae been obtaed, bt ony a w woknow ow to obta tem 16

(a caim that does not stcly speakg squae with the cts of the passage, there no es·

urect0n appearance t the scles f Mak's gose ends at 6 8, but the resrection IS stil

thee)4 Van Brggen cale such a textual comentay 976 to accompany the Ma¡orzty

Text Anient Text 39 b my knowege nne Is amost twenty yeas ate, fthcgHoges wen so as to cam that "hee no MaJoty eag cg so-caed conateones which canno be stongy eended on tena tansct0na gons both (De

fense 16 But when Fee calenge hm to o ths vey thg, thee was sence ReJode

59605 Cf e g Wsselk's dscuss0n hamzat0ns Assimilatwn) or Pickegs dscss0n

o conat0ns (dentity 171-202

H C Youtie he Textual Crztim of oumentary Papyr Prolegomena Instute oflassal Suies t Seent 33 2d ed London Uvesty of ondon 94) 16



THE AJORITY-TEXT THEOR: HTORY ETHOD AN CRTIQUE 5

The traditionalists distinguish themselves om all other textual criticsin that ther theory is ontrolled by results, not method. This 1 maintains oth aateish an hene- any MT avoatesbetays a pound ignorance167 of the entire e168

7 Cf g Fe's commens abu P1ckrings dep m1sundrstandng of ur d1scple "Rvw Arc pass1m No als irpon and Robsns cons1on hr ampt s qan1av anys1s (Origial Grek xv-xv1 49) Quan1a1v anays1s has do w1h thprcnag varia n agrmn bwn a as w M gnra, sors of varans ar vw and ny a w M whras P1rpnt and Robsn thnk rrs o h nmbr o MSha ar on a gvn varan (hs ony a hand ovar1ans ar vew coupd w1h a granmbr oM Quanav anays1s g1matly appd can hp o ndica whch M sand cs xual prx1m1ty t n anohr va h1r shard parn radngs B t canno busd dny my grpngs on h bas1s on varian conra 1rponbinson Oral

Greek 49 P1rpon and Robnsn apparny ry o s quanav anayss t dtrmnwhhr a paicar Byzanin radng has an vrwhmng maJor1y oM bhnd (70% rhghr Indd n hr m1sappcain o hs mous mhod rs a1cuad by E C CwMthd n Esabshng Quantav ainsh1ps bwn TxTyps w TsamnManuscr1ps, Studies i Methodooy i Textual Cntiism of the Nw Tstamt 6-62, onyh yzann M wud quay as a xyp snc h Byzantn M consu vr 0% alNT Grk M Obv10usy Cw had mant h1s h cd n hav cons1dr h Axandr1an o b a lgtma xyp rocaly, 1rpn and obnsons appcat1n n anygvn xua probm, h Alxandran anor Wsrn M ag w1h h Byzann hywuld b rgard as bngng th sam xtyp Th1r xpc1y havy dpndnc on Clw h1r rcnsrcn h x h Apcayps cas n qus1n th1r whol ndavor Orl Grek xvxv1) Th wrs cas o bghdnss n a purpordy scharyv] 1s srly o b und R ls Defs Ahough h1s om arnd h ahr a dcor o

ph1sphy dgr 1 1s d w1h vy magnabl rrr Th whsa ack o wrkng w1hprmay r vn cndary daa acnxual qoaons m1sappd mhds 1oic ammacal sc1sms and ypraph1ca rrrs 1 abad wod nmbr ovr n hsandSch a cavar ad ward h top1c s atrbab o th auhrs vrbarng dsm br 1s G A plngr New A Bbl Versos nr as A V, 93 Th bok was nwn m a schary prspcv b 1 wod b n xaggraon say ha hr ar hsands o m1saks t

168 Ths ar!c 1s a lngr vrs1n an ssay ha orgnay appard n The t of th Tstm m Cotmpor Rsearch Essas o th Sas Qasts SD 46 d B D Ehrmanand M W Homs Gran ap1ds Ermans Thans ar d sp1aly ms r h1sda an hrgh tg h1 pr

Documents

The Majority Text Theory, History, Methods and Critique (Daniel B. Wallace)