Hort spills the beans - ring of genuineness

Steven Avery

Administrator

Hort's Scientific Methods:
"The only indication we anywhere meet with of the ACTUAL GROUND of Dr. Hort's certainty, and reason of his preference, is his claim that: 'Every binary group [of MSS.] containing B is found to offer a large proportion of Readings, WHICH ON THE CLOSEST SCRUTINY, HAVE THE RING OF GENUINENESS: While it is difficult to find any Readings so attested which LOOK SUSPICIOUS after full consideration.' (p-227. Also vol. I. 557, where the dictum is repeated.)

XLVII And thus we have, at last, an honest confession of the ultimate principle which has determined the text of the present edition of the N.T., 'THE RING OF GENUINENESS'! This it must be which was referred to when 'instinctive processes of Criticism' were vaunted; and the candid avowal made that 'the experience which is THEIR FOUNDATION NEEDS PERPETUAL CORRECTION AND RECORRECTION.'

'We are obliged' (say these accomplished writers) 'TO COME TO THE INDIVIDUAL MIND AT LAST.'
And thus, behold, 'at last' we have reached the goal!..INDIVIDUAL IDIOSYNCRASY, NOT EXTERNAL EVIDENCE: READINGS STRONGLY PREFERRED, NOT READINGS STRONGLY ATTESTED: PERSONAL DISCERNMENT' (self! still self!) conscientiously exercising itself upon Codex B;--this is a true account of the Critical method pursued by these accomplished Scholars." (quoted in part from The Revision Revised, p-307,308, Conservative Classics, Box 308, Paradise, Pa. 17562)
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Steven Rafalsky
Puritan Board
https://www.puritanboard.com/thread...xt-critical-approach-and-the-esv.62566/page-5

Nearly a century ago George Salmon astutely observed that Westcott and Hort had attributed to the gospel writers “erroneous statements which their predecessors had regarded as copyists’ blunders.” Salmon noted that “there was indeed but little rhetorical exaggeration in the statement that the canon of these editors was that Codex B was infallible and that the Evangelists were not. Nay, it seemed as if Hort regarded it as a note of genuineness if a reading implies error on the part of the sacred writer.” [G. Salmon, Some Thoughts on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament (London: John Murray, 1897)]

Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/groups/467217787457422/posts/1531827254329798/?comment_id=1532431984269325

Salmon p. 26
https://books.google.com/books?id=ZoRJAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA26
 
Last edited:
Top