Scholarly Reading
9/1/26
Metzger, Bruce M. & Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). "Chapter 3: The Precritical Period: The Origin and Dominance of the Textus Receptus." (pp. 137-164). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th Edition). New York: Oxford University Press. (Personal Library)
Though the Latin Vulgate was published printed using movable type by 1456, it was not until 1514 that Greek typographical customs were adequately developed to print a Greek New Testament (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 138). This was largely due to indecision regarding the many abbreviated forms and combinations of letters used in the manuscript tradition.
The manuscript or manuscripts used to prepare the various print runs remain a matter of some uncertainty (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, pp. 141-142). Metzger and Ehrman discuss the edition of Erasmus of Rotterdam, which is known to have had different sources for different portions, as well as a passage for which Erasmus had no Greek manuscript so translated the passage from the Vulgate into Greek himself (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 145). Erasmus' edition became the foundation of the Textus Receptus, and went through numerous editions as evidence for readings was discovered up to a fifth edition in 1535 (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 148).
After the release of the Textus Receptus, Metzger and Ehrman discuss a process of collation of variant readings, which went on for nearly 200 years (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 153). The variant readings which were found would normally be referenced in the apparatus of Greek editions. As time progressed, scholars moved to more accurate catalogs of information about the manuscript evidence consulted. By the early 1700s, editions of the Greek New Testament would often depart from the Textus Receptus. The editors would also begin to include comments about why they chose the readings or interpretations they did (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 158).
Metzger and Ehrman see the formal practice of critical scholarship arising in the first half of the 18th century, as scholars, recognizing that mere age or frequency of a reading could be misleading, began to weigh the accuracy of various manuscript traditions (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 159). As the second half of the 18th century progressed, evaluation methods continued to become more granular and specific (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, pp. 160-161).
9/1/26
Metzger, Bruce M. & Ehrman, Bart D. (2005). "Chapter 3: The Precritical Period: The Origin and Dominance of the Textus Receptus." (pp. 137-164). The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (4th Edition). New York: Oxford University Press. (Personal Library)
Though the Latin Vulgate was published printed using movable type by 1456, it was not until 1514 that Greek typographical customs were adequately developed to print a Greek New Testament (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 138). This was largely due to indecision regarding the many abbreviated forms and combinations of letters used in the manuscript tradition.
The manuscript or manuscripts used to prepare the various print runs remain a matter of some uncertainty (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, pp. 141-142). Metzger and Ehrman discuss the edition of Erasmus of Rotterdam, which is known to have had different sources for different portions, as well as a passage for which Erasmus had no Greek manuscript so translated the passage from the Vulgate into Greek himself (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 145). Erasmus' edition became the foundation of the Textus Receptus, and went through numerous editions as evidence for readings was discovered up to a fifth edition in 1535 (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 148).
After the release of the Textus Receptus, Metzger and Ehrman discuss a process of collation of variant readings, which went on for nearly 200 years (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 153). The variant readings which were found would normally be referenced in the apparatus of Greek editions. As time progressed, scholars moved to more accurate catalogs of information about the manuscript evidence consulted. By the early 1700s, editions of the Greek New Testament would often depart from the Textus Receptus. The editors would also begin to include comments about why they chose the readings or interpretations they did (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 158).
Metzger and Ehrman see the formal practice of critical scholarship arising in the first half of the 18th century, as scholars, recognizing that mere age or frequency of a reading could be misleading, began to weigh the accuracy of various manuscript traditions (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, p. 159). As the second half of the 18th century progressed, evaluation methods continued to become more granular and specific (Metzger & Ehrman 2005, pp. 160-161).
RSS Feed