New Interview with Dr. Robinson

[John of Japan]

Hi, everyone.

Here is a new interview with Dr. Maurice Robinson: http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/

At least a basic knowledge of textual criticism is needed, but if you have that knowledge you will be enlightened about Byzantine Priority and its differences from other majority text methods such as Hodges/Farstad and Pickering's

Questions that will be answered include:

How similar are the various Byz/Maj Greek NTs?
Does Byzantine Priority simply count the mss behind a reading and go with the more numerous?
Why does the Robinson/Pierpont Byzantine Textform Greek NT have a different order of the NT books?
Would a mathematical formula of some kind be useful in determining mss priority?

Enjoy!

 

[John of Japan]

By the way, I'd be happy to interact with anyone about the interview, but I may not be able to do much this week. It's the beginning of the school year and this week's schedule is crowded.

 

[TCassidy]

Great read! I got an email from him yesterday that pointed me toward this blog. I have been reading and re-reading it ever since.

What an opportunity to learn! And not from just anyone, but from the man who I believe is the most knowledgeable, and balanced, textual critic of our generation.

Thanks for posting this, John.

 

[John of Japan]

And now Part 2 of the Interview has been posted in the same location.

Here is a very important point by Dr. Robinson: "A primary principle of internal evidence should be to presume accidental error as more likely than intentional alteration, especially where omission might result from transcriptional failure and yet still produce a “sensible” reading — one that then would be less likely to receive correction in subsequent copies within its particular transmissional line."

As anyone who has copied any long passage by hand knows, it is quite easy to leave out words, phrases or even sentences. However, purposeful additions are quite rare in a straight up copy. Purposeful additions may be more likely by copyists of the ancient mss, but surely accidental omission should be the first suspect. (I love how Dr. Robinson dissects Metzger's complicated explanation of Luke 6:1. Those eclectics--always making it harder than it has to be. )

 

[Van]

Luke 6:1 has the second Sabbath after the first. Does that refer to the second one in a month, or to the third, the second one after the first, which would be the third. Matthew 12:1, and Mark 2:23 refer to a or the Sabbath. It certainly seems more likely that the odd-ball designation was omitted by accident or by intention, than someone would add it to make it read different from the parallel passages. So why did the doctrine of the more difficult reading not put the designation in the CT?

 

[TCassidy]

The part of the word δευτεροπρωτω (which is, I believe, an hapax legomena) translated "first" (πρωτω) may not be an ordinal number but may have meant “foremost” in this case. If the time frame of Luke 6 is, indeed, the time of unleavened bread, then it may refer to the first sabbath after the second day of unleavened bread. The first day of Passover was always a High Sabbath, so the reading may have been understood to mean "Now on the second day after the Chief (or "foremost") Sabbath," referring to the High Holy Day.

But the truth is we don't know what it means. We don't have any information from the 1st century that would tell us what the average reader of that day would understand when he read the passage.

 

[Van]

Thanks, very informative.

 

[John of Japan]

Part 3 of the interview is now on the website.

 

[evangelist6589]

Hi, everyone.

Here is a new interview with Dr. Maurice Robinson: http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/

At least a basic knowledge of textual criticism is needed, but if you have that knowledge you will be enlightened about Byzantine Priority and its differences from other majority text methods such as Hodges/Farstad and Pickering's

Questions that will be answered include:

How similar are the various Byz/Maj Greek NTs?
Does Byzantine Priority simply count the mss behind a reading and go with the more numerous?
Why does the Robinson/Pierpont Byzantine Textform Greek NT have a different order of the NT books?
Would a mathematical formula of some kind be useful in determining mss priority?

Enjoy!

Is this the guy that Dr. white refuted?

 

[TCassidy]

Is this the guy that Dr. white refuted?

No. Dr. Maurice Robinson is probably the greatest textual critic alive today.

Here are some books for you to read.

Analytical Lexicon of New Testament Greek: Revised and Updated
by Maurice A Robinson and Mark A House

The Greek New Testament for Beginning Readers: The Byzantine Greek Text & Verb Parsing
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont

Perspectives on the Ending of Mark: Four Views
by Maurice Robinson and Darrell L. Bock

The New Testament in the Original Greek, Byzantine Textform
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont
Kindle Edition

Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible, New Testament,
by Jay Patrick Sr. Green and Maurice Robinson

The New Testament in the Original Greek (Greek Edition)
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont

Greek New Testament (Textus Receptus) with Strong's Numbers Added
by Maurice A Robinson and William G Pierpont
Kindle Edition

Greek New Testament, Byzantine Textform (Annotated)
by Maurice Robinson and William Pierpont
Kindle Edition

A Concise Lexicon to the Biblical Languages
by Maurice Robinson PhD and Jay P. Green Sr.

Indexes to All Editions of BDB Hebrew English Lexicon
by Maurice Robinson PhD

Indexes to all editions of Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon and Thayer's Greek lexicon
by Maurice A Robinson

New Testament in the Original Greek: According to the Byzantine-Majority Textform
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont

Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible with Strong's Numbers, (The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible)
by Jay Patrick Sr. Green and Maurice Robinson

You might also read:

"The Credibility of the Majority Text Theory and its Value for Apologetics."
Presented to the Southeastern Regional Meeting of the Evangelical
Theological Society, Nashville, Tennessee, March 1986.

"Majority Text Affirmations and Peter's Denials: On Keeping Critical Issues
Distinct." Presented to the Southeastern Regional Meeting of the
Evangelical Theological Society, Dayton, Tennessee, March 1990.

"The Case for the Byzantine/Majority Textform." Presented to the Southeastern
Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Toccoa Falls,
Georgia, March 1991.

"The Ending of Mark in Codex Vaticanus: A Feasible Solution." Presented to the
Southeastern Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society,
Collegedale, Tennessee, March 1993.

"The Recensional Nature of the Alexandrian Text-Type: A Response to Selected
Criticisms of the Byzantine-Priority Theory." Presented to the
Southeastern Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society,
Louisville, Kentucky, March 1994.

"Two Passages in Mark: A Critical Test for the Byzantine-Priority Hypothesis."
Presented to the 46th Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological
Society, Chicago, Illinois, November 1994.

“The Bondage of the Word: Copyright and the Bible.” Faculty lecture,
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fall 1995.

"The Conundrum of Acts 12:25." Presented to the Southeastern Regional
Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Mobile, Alabama,
March 1996.

“The Bondage of the Word: Copyright and the Bible.” Presented to the 48th
Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Jackson,
Tennessee, November 1996 [revised and expanded form of the faculty
lecture cited above].

“Preliminary Observations regarding the Pericope Adulterae based on Complete
Collations of all available Continuous-Text Manuscripts and over One
Hundred Lectionaries.” Presented to the 50th Annual Meeting of the
Evangelical Theological Society, Orlando, Florida, November 1998.

“Investigating Text-Critical Dichotomy: A Critique of Modern Eclectic Praxis from
a Byzantine-Priority Perspective.” Presented to SEON (Stichting
Evangelische Oud- en Nieuwtestamentici = The Evangelical Old and
New Testament Foundation), Doorn, The Netherlands, March 1998.

“Investigating Text-Critical Dichotomy: A Critique of Modern Eclectic Praxis from
a Byzantine-Priority Perspective.” Presented to the Southeastern
Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Wake Forest,
North Carolina, March 1999 [abridgment of the longer Netherlands
paper].

“New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority.” Presented
to the Symposium on New Testament Studies: A Time for Reappraisal,
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North
Carolina, 6-7 April 2000.

“In Search of the Alexandrian Archetype: A Byzantine-priority Perspective.”
Presented to the Lille (France) International Colloquium on New
Testament Textual Criticism, 10-13 July 2000.

“Crossing Boundaries in New Testament Textual Criticism: Historical
Revisionism and the Case of Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener.”
Presented to the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological
Society, Colorado Springs, Colorado, November 2001.

“Incipit/Explicit: Lectionary Influence on the Continuous-Text Manuscripts
belonging to the Byzantine Textform.” Presented to the 55th Annual
Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Atlanta, Georgia,
November 2003.

“Incomplete Truth and its Consequences: A Clarification of the Manuscript
Evidence regarding 2 Corinthians 1:6-7” Presented to the Evangelical
Theological Society, 56th Annual Meeting, 17-19 November 2004, San
Antonio, Texas.

“Rule 9, Isolated Variants, and the ‘Test-Tube’ Nature of the NA27 Text” (abridged
version). Presented at Tyndale House, Cambridge, England, 6 May
2005.

“Rule 9, Isolated Variants, and the ‘Test-Tube’ Nature of the NA27 Text.”
Presented at the Bingham Colloquium, “From Text to Translation,”
McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Ontario, 26-28 May 2005.

“Text-Critical Notes: The Rich Man and Lazarus – Luke 16:19-31.” Presented at
the Bingham Colloquium, “From Text to Translation,” McMaster Divinity
College, Hamilton, Ontario, 26-28 May 2005.

“The Integrity of the Early New Testament Text: A Collation-based Comparison
utilizing the Papyri of the Second and Third Centuries.” Presented to the
Evangelical Theological Society, 57th Annual Meeting, 16-18 November
2005, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania.

"The Byzantine Portions of Codex Washingtonianus: A Centenary
Retrospective." Presented to the Evangelical Theological Society, 58th
Annual Meeting, 15-17 November 2006, Washington DC.

"'Misquoting Jesus: Bart Ehrman's approach to the New Testament Text."
Faculty Lecture, University of Lund, Sweden, 12 December 2006.

"The Woman taken in Adultery in the Temple (Joh 7:53-8:11)." Faculty seminar,
University of Lund, Sweden, 13 December 2006.

"Amid Perfect Contempt, a Place for the Genuine: The Long Ending of Mark as
Canonical Verity." Presented to the Symposium, The Last Twelve
Verses of Mark: Original or Not? Southeastern Baptist Theological
Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina, 13-14 April 2007.

“Eclectic Observations regarding the Current Critical Text.” Presented to the
Evangelical Theological Society, 60th Annual Meeting, 19-21 November
2008, Providence, Rhode Island.

“Impossible Readings and the Original Text: The Case of Acts 4:25.” Presented
to the Evangelical Theological Society, Southeastern Regional Meeting,
3-4 April 2009, Chattanooga, Tennessee.

“The Establishment of an Underlying Base Text with Variant Footnotes as a
Necessary Preliminary to Translation and Exegesis.” Presented to the
2010 International Symposium, Centre for Training and Research in
Bible Translation, Canadian Bible Society, Concordia University,
Montreal, Quebec, 25-26 May 2010.

When you have finished reading all of the above, come back and tell me how he was "refuted."

Oh, and "this guy" has served as:

Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies and Languages, St. Petersburg Baptist
College, St. Petersburg, Florida (1982-1984) ;

Associate Professor of Biblical Studies and Languages, Luther Rice Seminary,
Jacksonville, Florida (l985-1991);

Associate Professor of New Testament and Greek, Southeastern Baptist
Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina (1991-1996);

Professor of New Testament and Greek, Southeastern Baptist Theological
Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina (1996-2002);

Senior Professor of New Testament and Greek, Southeastern Baptist
Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina (April 2002-present).

After receiving the following degrees:

A. A., Manatee Junior College, Bradenton, Florida, 1967.

B. A. (English/Secondary Education), University of South Florida,
Tampa, 1969.

M. Div., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest,
North Carolina, 1973.

Th. M., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest,
North Carolina, 1975.

Ph.D., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fort Worth, Texas, 1982.

Refute that!

 

[evangelist6589]

No. Dr. Maurice Robinson is probably the greatest textual critic alive today.

Here are some books for you to read.

Analytical Lexicon of New Testament Greek: Revised and Updated
by Maurice A Robinson and Mark A House

The Greek New Testament for Beginning Readers: The Byzantine Greek Text & Verb Parsing
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont

Perspectives on the Ending of Mark: Four Views
by Maurice Robinson and Darrell L. Bock

The New Testament in the Original Greek, Byzantine Textform
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont
Kindle Edition

Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible, New Testament,
by Jay Patrick Sr. Green and Maurice Robinson

The New Testament in the Original Greek (Greek Edition)
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont

Greek New Testament (Textus Receptus) with Strong's Numbers Added
by Maurice A Robinson and William G Pierpont
Kindle Edition

Greek New Testament, Byzantine Textform (Annotated)
by Maurice Robinson and William Pierpont
Kindle Edition

A Concise Lexicon to the Biblical Languages
by Maurice Robinson PhD and Jay P. Green Sr.

Indexes to All Editions of BDB Hebrew English Lexicon
by Maurice Robinson PhD

Indexes to all editions of Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew lexicon and Thayer's Greek lexicon
by Maurice A Robinson

New Testament in the Original Greek: According to the Byzantine-Majority Textform
by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont

Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible with Strong's Numbers, (The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible)
by Jay Patrick Sr. Green and Maurice Robinson

You might also read:

"The Credibility of the Majority Text Theory and its Value for Apologetics."
Presented to the Southeastern Regional Meeting of the Evangelical
Theological Society, Nashville, Tennessee, March 1986.

"Majority Text Affirmations and Peter's Denials: On Keeping Critical Issues
Distinct." Presented to the Southeastern Regional Meeting of the
Evangelical Theological Society, Dayton, Tennessee, March 1990.

"The Case for the Byzantine/Majority Textform." Presented to the Southeastern
Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Toccoa Falls,
Georgia, March 1991.

"The Ending of Mark in Codex Vaticanus: A Feasible Solution." Presented to the
Southeastern Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society,
Collegedale, Tennessee, March 1993.

"The Recensional Nature of the Alexandrian Text-Type: A Response to Selected
Criticisms of the Byzantine-Priority Theory." Presented to the
Southeastern Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society,
Louisville, Kentucky, March 1994.

"Two Passages in Mark: A Critical Test for the Byzantine-Priority Hypothesis."
Presented to the 46th Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological
Society, Chicago, Illinois, November 1994.

“The Bondage of the Word: Copyright and the Bible.” Faculty lecture,
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Fall 1995.

"The Conundrum of Acts 12:25." Presented to the Southeastern Regional
Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Mobile, Alabama,
March 1996.

“The Bondage of the Word: Copyright and the Bible.” Presented to the 48th
Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Jackson,
Tennessee, November 1996 [revised and expanded form of the faculty
lecture cited above].

“Preliminary Observations regarding the Pericope Adulterae based on Complete
Collations of all available Continuous-Text Manuscripts and over One
Hundred Lectionaries.” Presented to the 50th Annual Meeting of the
Evangelical Theological Society, Orlando, Florida, November 1998.

“Investigating Text-Critical Dichotomy: A Critique of Modern Eclectic Praxis from
a Byzantine-Priority Perspective.” Presented to SEON (Stichting
Evangelische Oud- en Nieuwtestamentici = The Evangelical Old and
New Testament Foundation), Doorn, The Netherlands, March 1998.

“Investigating Text-Critical Dichotomy: A Critique of Modern Eclectic Praxis from
a Byzantine-Priority Perspective.” Presented to the Southeastern
Regional Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Wake Forest,
North Carolina, March 1999 [abridgment of the longer Netherlands
paper].

“New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority.” Presented
to the Symposium on New Testament Studies: A Time for Reappraisal,
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North
Carolina, 6-7 April 2000.

“In Search of the Alexandrian Archetype: A Byzantine-priority Perspective.”
Presented to the Lille (France) International Colloquium on New
Testament Textual Criticism, 10-13 July 2000.

“Crossing Boundaries in New Testament Textual Criticism: Historical
Revisionism and the Case of Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener.”
Presented to the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological
Society, Colorado Springs, Colorado, November 2001.

“Incipit/Explicit: Lectionary Influence on the Continuous-Text Manuscripts
belonging to the Byzantine Textform.” Presented to the 55th Annual
Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Atlanta, Georgia,
November 2003.

“Incomplete Truth and its Consequences: A Clarification of the Manuscript
Evidence regarding 2 Corinthians 1:6-7” Presented to the Evangelical
Theological Society, 56th Annual Meeting, 17-19 November 2004, San
Antonio, Texas.

“Rule 9, Isolated Variants, and the ‘Test-Tube’ Nature of the NA27 Text” (abridged
version). Presented at Tyndale House, Cambridge, England, 6 May
2005.

“Rule 9, Isolated Variants, and the ‘Test-Tube’ Nature of the NA27 Text.”
Presented at the Bingham Colloquium, “From Text to Translation,”
McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Ontario, 26-28 May 2005.

“Text-Critical Notes: The Rich Man and Lazarus – Luke 16:19-31.” Presented at
the Bingham Colloquium, “From Text to Translation,” McMaster Divinity
College, Hamilton, Ontario, 26-28 May 2005.

“The Integrity of the Early New Testament Text: A Collation-based Comparison
utilizing the Papyri of the Second and Third Centuries.” Presented to the
Evangelical Theological Society, 57th Annual Meeting, 16-18 November
2005, Valley Forge, Pennsylvania.

"The Byzantine Portions of Codex Washingtonianus: A Centenary
Retrospective." Presented to the Evangelical Theological Society, 58th
Annual Meeting, 15-17 November 2006, Washington DC.

"'Misquoting Jesus: Bart Ehrman's approach to the New Testament Text."
Faculty Lecture, University of Lund, Sweden, 12 December 2006.

"The Woman taken in Adultery in the Temple (Joh 7:53-8:11)." Faculty seminar,
University of Lund, Sweden, 13 December 2006.

"Amid Perfect Contempt, a Place for the Genuine: The Long Ending of Mark as
Canonical Verity." Presented to the Symposium, The Last Twelve
Verses of Mark: Original or Not? Southeastern Baptist Theological
Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina, 13-14 April 2007.

“Eclectic Observations regarding the Current Critical Text.” Presented to the
Evangelical Theological Society, 60th Annual Meeting, 19-21 November
2008, Providence, Rhode Island.

“Impossible Readings and the Original Text: The Case of Acts 4:25.” Presented
to the Evangelical Theological Society, Southeastern Regional Meeting,
3-4 April 2009, Chattanooga, Tennessee.

“The Establishment of an Underlying Base Text with Variant Footnotes as a
Necessary Preliminary to Translation and Exegesis.” Presented to the
2010 International Symposium, Centre for Training and Research in
Bible Translation, Canadian Bible Society, Concordia University,
Montreal, Quebec, 25-26 May 2010.

When you have finished reading all of the above, come back and tell me how he was "refuted."

I usually do not read Biblical studies type books for they are above my head. Usually I stick to evangelism and theology books.

 

[TCassidy]

I usually do not read Biblical studies type books for they are above my head. Usually I stick to evangelism and theology books.

It shows. And over half of the listed publications, above, are Theological in nature. Mostly in Bibliology.

 

[TCassidy]

Yes he is! Maurice Robinson is [Slander Edited] and Dr. white challenged him to debate.

You may not slander a good and Godly man. I am deleting your post. Don't do it again!

 

[TCassidy]

Maurice Robinson:

I do not get involved with nor engage in debate with those holding to the so-called KJVO position. Those who choose to defend a particular translation as “perfect” or in some cases as “the only accurate” English version are welcome to their belief, but in reality these have no real interest in determining the original Greek or Hebrew readings, particularly if such might require correction either to their preferred English text or to the Greek TR or Hebrew Masoretic texts decreed “by faith” to underlie that particular English text. In effect, their only interaction with text-critical issues seems to be to attack or question those who differ from their predetermined position; thus it is difficult if not impossible to engage in meaningful dialogue with those whose mind is already made up and who in actual practice allow a relatively late English translation to become the final arbiter of the original Greek or Hebrew autographs. I would make a distinction, however, even while not accepting either position, between those who are KJVO and have no need whatever for the Greek of the NT and those who are TRO and are at least willing to appeal to the underlying Greek for exegetical insight.

I generally do not post at other sites by deliberate choice. First, I am too busy to blog (and I don’t Tweet, Twitter, or Text either); second, I am generally disappointed by the nature and tone of most online text-critical or translational comment blogs, particularly since the KJVO writers tend to monopolize or hijack virtually all discussions, and I have no interest in dealing with what I consider illogical sophistry, conspiracy theories, and agenda-driven propagandistic blather. I have posted (rarely) on the Yahoo Byzantine Text discussion list, but almost exclusively on the ETC blogsite. I do have a couple of articles and reviews available online through the electronic TC Journal, but that’s about all.

 

[evangelist6589]

Maurice Robinson:

I do not get involved with nor engage in debate with those holding to the so-called KJVO position. Those who choose to defend a particular translation as “perfect” or in some cases as “the only accurate” English version are welcome to their belief, but in reality these have no real interest in determining the original Greek or Hebrew readings, particularly if such might require correction either to their preferred English text or to the Greek TR or Hebrew Masoretic texts decreed “by faith” to underlie that particular English text. In effect, their only interaction with text-critical issues seems to be to attack or question those who differ from their predetermined position; thus it is difficult if not impossible to engage in meaningful dialogue with those whose mind is already made up and who in actual practice allow a relatively late English translation to become the final arbiter of the original Greek or Hebrew autographs. I would make a distinction, however, even while not accepting either position, between those who are KJVO and have no need whatever for the Greek of the NT and those who are TRO and are at least willing to appeal to the underlying Greek for exegetical insight.

I generally do not post at other sites by deliberate choice. First, I am too busy to blog (and I don’t Tweet, Twitter, or Text either); second, I am generally disappointed by the nature and tone of most online text-critical or translational comment blogs, particularly since the KJVO writers tend to monopolize or hijack virtually all discussions, and I have no interest in dealing with what I consider illogical sophistry, conspiracy theories, and agenda-driven propagandistic blather. I have posted (rarely) on the Yahoo Byzantine Text discussion list, but almost exclusively on the ETC blogsite. I do have a couple of articles and reviews available online through the electronic TC Journal, but that’s about all.

Okay I was wrong or whatever I read on google misled me. I apologize.

 

[McCree79]

Is this the guy that Dr. white refuted?

Sort of....

White is a CT guy and Robinson is MT priority. I do believe there was a "friendly" exchange of ideas. That was about the extent of it. The difference only involved a CT vs. MT priority. White, as far I know, has never questioned the ability or work of Robinson.



Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

 

[TCassidy]

Sort of....

White is a CT guy and Robinson is MT priority. I do believe there was a "friendly" exchange of ideas. That was about the extent of it. The difference only involved a CT vs. MT priority. White, as far I know, has never questioned the ability or work of Robinson.

As much as I respect James White and his ministry of apologetics, there is a huge difference between his academic attainments and Dr. Robinson's academic attainments.

James White has an MA from Fuller Theological Seminary.

Dr. Robinson's CV is considerably superior.

Add to that the fact that Dr. Robinson's area of study for almost 50 years has been in the field of Textual Criticism wherein James White as little to no formal training or experience in that discipline.

Dr. Robinson's irrefutable point that the CT's eclecticism has created a text that never existed prior to the mid 19th century, and thus is counter to the very purpose of New Testament Textual Criticism, which is "ad fontes" - Latin for "(back) to the source."

The purpose of New Testament Textual Criticism is to determine the original reading, not construct a reading that never existed in the history of the church.

 

[JonC]

As much as I respect James White and his ministry of apologetics, there is a huge difference between his academic attainments and Dr. Robinson's academic attainments.

James White has an MA from Fuller Theological Seminary.

Dr. Robinson's CV is considerably superior.

Add to that the fact that Dr. Robinson's area of study for almost 50 years has been in the field of Textual Criticism wherein James White as little to no formal training or experience in that discipline.

Dr. Robinson's irrefutable point that the CT's eclecticism has created a text that never existed prior to the mid 19th century, and thus is counter to the very purpose of New Testament Textual Criticism, which is "ad fontes" - Latin for "(back) to the source."

The purpose of New Testament Textual Criticism is to determine the original reading, not construct a reading that never existed in the history of the church.

So, basically, you are suggesting that Dr. Robinson is to textual criticism what Ray Comfort is to evangelism?

 

[TCassidy]

So, basically, you are suggesting that Dr. Robinson is to textual criticism what Ray Comfort is to evangelism?

No. I am saying that Dr. Robinson is a qualified textual critic without peer in today's academia.

 

[John of Japan]

Is this the guy that Dr. white refuted?

White debating Maurice Robinson would be like a 4 year old boy trying to beat up Randy Couture, former UFC heavyweight champion and an MMA legend (not to mention being an NCAA wrestling champ back in the day).