On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Stein A. [iso-8859-1] Strømme wrote:
> Another possible take at this (no comparison with Vernon here, though :)
> would be along the lines of Ivan Panin
>
> (http://tanana.iarc.uaf.edu/panin/panin.html),
>
> whose lifelong study of detailed biblical numerics actually led him to
> publish his very own version of the Greek NT, where presence of certain
> numerical patterns where used as a decision criterion between variant
> readings, and even with numerically-induced "corrections". His basis
> was the Westcott & Hort edition
>
> (http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/GNT/books.html),
>
> which he hailed as the best of all published editions before his own.
> This is slightly ironic, in view of the massive campaign later
> launched by evangelicals against biblical criticism,
>
> (http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages/rlister/wh/wh.htm)
>
> is but one example turning up on Google.
>
> Stein
> --
> Stein Arild Strømme <http://www.mi.uib.no/~stromme>
>
I think that it is important to distinguish between two types of biblical
criticism. There is lower criticism, which seeks to recover the original
text of the Bible. Higher criticism deals with such issues as authorship.
The Fundamentals were written to defend the Scriptures against the higher
critics, who claimed that much of the history was fabricated and the
prophecies invented after their fulfillment. Lower criticism should belong
to conservatives, who should be very interested in knowing exactly what
the original of the inspired writings said.
Evangelicals have certainly made strong attacks on the higher critics, but
many evangelicals welcome the advances made in textual criticism. Of
course, there are many who believe that the version they have must be the
original, and there is also obvious reluctance to let go of a passage such
as John 7:53-8:11.
Gordon Brown
Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0395
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 05 2001 - 17:47:31 EDT