An academic forum to discuss the Bible's manuscripts and textual history from the perspective of historic evangelical theology.
Maurice A. Robinson11/25/2014 8:00 pm
On the other hand, I find Richard Laurence's 200-year-old comments regarding Griesbach's system quite applicable, mutatis mutandis, to the current CBGM scenario:
“It is natural therefore to expect, that every novel mode of ascertaining the validity of a reading will be at first received with caution, and long watched with jealousy. And notwithstanding the ability which has been displayed in support of Griesbach’s theory, notwithstanding the high tone which it has assumed in the literary world, I must confess, that it is far from producing in my own mind complete conviction.
“I shall . . . only be understood as urging the propriety of circumspection upon the points of the practical conception and application of Griesbach’s particular hypothesis . . . : but as it is extremely liable to be misconceived as well as misapplied; is so intricate in its construction; is so difficult to be detailed with precision, or even to be made out in its subordinate arrangements; and is so readily convertible to party purposes; surely we should again and again contemplate it, and that in every possible point of view, before we consent to admit the conclusions which have been deduced from it into general currency.”
Richard Laurence, Remarks upon the Systematical Classification of Manuscripts adopted by Griesbach in his Edition of the Greek Testament. Oxford: At the University Press for the Author, 1814, pp. 6-7.