tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post9205599512440949023..comments2024-03-03T21:51:46.662-05:00Comments on stylos: An atheist accurately describes "the end of text criticism"Jeffrey T. Riddlehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-53188875171879950562018-01-09T08:56:10.179-05:002018-01-09T08:56:10.179-05:00John James: Good question. And Hugh has succinctly...John James: Good question. And Hugh has succinctly given part of what, IMHO, is the answer. To which we might add: Relentless and vigorous Enlightenment-influenced promotion of the critical text and modern translations based upon them (see Metzger), evangelical accommodation to and appropriation of modern text criticism (see Warfield and Robertson), the construal of "inerrancy" (of the autographa) rather than "infallibility" (of the apographa), reaction against the reactionary KJV-Only movement, and the desire for academic and intellectual respectability.Jeffrey T. Riddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-6226078747331234362018-01-08T21:13:16.519-05:002018-01-08T21:13:16.519-05:00*Metzger**Metzger*Hugh McCannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03267834741936303800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-7783249690774241342018-01-08T18:55:33.663-05:002018-01-08T18:55:33.663-05:00Jeff why is the CT accepted in reformed denominati...Jeff why is the CT accepted in reformed denominations as well as seminaries such as westminster(east) and RTS? From my understanding the RSV was rejected for a long time by conservative reformed evangelicals. Why the sudden change in direction? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05898553692538415367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-71440970600653865282018-01-05T08:34:33.043-05:002018-01-05T08:34:33.043-05:00Thanks for the comment. Glad to hear you've be...Thanks for the comment. Glad to hear you've been reading Lunn. Yes, it's amazing to see how much the "assured results" of scholarship depend on one's presuppositions. If you assume Mark 16:9-20 is not original, you find reasons to believe this. And many of those presuppositions are based in naturalistic assumptions, hostile to the traditional Christianity.Jeffrey T. Riddlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16374856944409335186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19219922.post-69191481388078772502018-01-05T00:22:57.790-05:002018-01-05T00:22:57.790-05:00Amen! I just finished reading the linguistics evid...Amen! I just finished reading the linguistics evidence section of Nicholas P. Lunn's "The Original Ending of Mark", which is a fascinating read, but the practical atheism which idrequired to argue within biblical academia is very troubling. Please excuse my orthography.No Experthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11968546494524640905noreply@blogger.com