James White Speaks about Greer Heard Forum
My inner textual criticism geek has not been fed properly doing all this Sunday School study on Genesis, so I am pleased to see that James White, author of The King James Only Controversyand big-time textual critical geek himself, has reviewed some of the audio from Dan Wallace and Bart Ehrman’s Friday night debate in New Orleans on April 4, 2008.
You can download the free versions of his semi-regular web cast which include this topic here and here
There is also an ongoing linked blog series “Introduction to Textual Criticism” on White’s website that begins here.
Feed your inner textual critical geek. And if you don’t have one, now is the time to get one. This is a topic that is only going to become more common in dialogues about Christianity.
I have a love/hate relationship with textual criticism. I love it when it’s actually beneficial, like when speaking with a Muslim or KJV only advocate and they start talking about what the Bible says. But I hate it when it’s not useful, like pretty much all the time, excluding those times when it is.
There haven’t been any really significant advances in the last 100 years with regard to the text of the NT, so all in all, it’s kind of like beating a dead horse. And I wonder, when Wallace argues that no cardinal doctrines are affected by variants, and that only something like 1%-2% of all variants are both meaningful and viable, then what really is the point? How important are they?
Who knows, maybe as I learn more Greek I’ll end up with a deeper appreciation for TC (like I used to have when I was first introduced to it). Time will tell… BTW, what have you personally gained from your study of textual criticism?
Comment by Nick Norelli — May 3, 2008 @ 11:11 am
roger that big time - to what nick said.
chuck.
while i dislike your switch over to wordpress, I have to say that i’m impressed with just how much your writing has picked up since you did so. keep it up.
keep working on brevity tho… sometimes i fly right past your longer posts to your shorter ones because i can digest them better. (my attention span is short… often even shorter than i write, and mine are a lot shorter than yours…
but not everyone has the same problem I do…
i suppose i’m happy as long as you still have some shorter ones mixed in…
Comment by Roger Mugs — May 3, 2008 @ 11:54 am
Nick and Roger,
I find textual criticism useful because it not only helps determine the original wording, but it also gives an idea of how a text has been interpreted through time. As well, it provides a window into Christian history, something most Christians know far too little about. And again it keeps me using what little Greek I have, which is a good thing.
As for the lack of significant advances in 100 years, every field of study is new to someone, and any number of areas of study are “beating a dead horse”, as it were. Dan Wallace argues that the major importance of the 1-2% meaningful and viable variants is in orthopraxis, not orthodoxy.
Roger,
WordPress seems so much more 21st century, while blogger seems so 20th. And the tools are a little nicer in wordpress.
I shall keep mixing longer and shorter posts, but you’re just going to have to do something about that attention span of yours. You’re missing a lot of great stuff.
Comment by Chuck Grantham — May 3, 2008 @ 1:54 pm