Westcott - Hort do NOT represent the the "Majority Text" tradition.
Westcott - Hort DO represent the Alexandrian tradition. That is, Westcott - Hort use the OLDEST available manuscripts... which INVARIABLY come from EGYPT... whose DRY climate preserves them.
FOR THE RECORD, and I challenge and dare you ALL to assail and disprove my assertion:
blaming the Majority Text family for being younger than the Alexandrian...
which fact arises only because the Majority Texts are drawn from wetter climates in Turkey, Greece and elsewhere around the Mediterranean outside of papyrus-preserving Egypt's dry climate...
is exactly like blaming a malnourished Ethiopian for being short, just because he grew up in leaner times. See what I'm saying?
Quote-unquote "Tradition"... that is, the Majority Text family favored by the Eastern Orthodox and which undergirds the Textus Receptus which in turn undergirds the Authorized Version 1611... IS a "Tradition" because the scribes in the Orthodox East, and everywhere else outside of Egypt...
HAD TO REPEATEDLY RECOPY THEIR MANUSCRIPTS BECAUSE THEY RAPIDLY DETERIORATED.
GET ANGRY WITH ME AFTER, A-F-T-E-R, AFTER YOU GROCK THIS CONCEPT PLEASE. (!)
One more time! WHY are the Alexandrian manuscripts way older? WHY?
Because Egypt has a dry papyrus-friendly climate!
And one more time! WHY are the Majority Text family manuscripts way younger? WHY?
Because everywhere else has a wet papyrus-ornery-mean climate!
And yet one more time! WHY are the Majority Text manuscripts subject to a "Tradition"? WHY?
Because 1000s of scribes over 1000+ years had to painstakingly copy and recopy and re-recopy their rapidly decaying manuscripts in their sopping wet papyrus-hating climate!
(I'm exaggerating this somewhat, the Majority Text family manuscripts are still 100s of years old, just not 1500 years old.)
THEREFORE!
When you willy-nilly throw aside the ::quote-fingers:: "Tradition" of the Eastern Orthodox Majority Text family of manuscripts...
You are DISSING the hard work of 1000s of scribes across the Mediterranean Christian world who labored for over 1000 years to, if you will, light torch (new manuscript) from torch (old manuscript) to keep the Flame alive!
People!
1000s of scribes... across over 1000 years... MULTIPLY THE TWO, THOUSANDS BY THOUSANDS... and you are talking about MILLIONS OF MAN-YEARS OF HARD WORK by those scribes you so flippantly dis!
Hate me A-F-T-E-R you grock this concept!
You are casting aside and dissing MILLIONS of MAN-YEARS of EYE-STRAINING, HAND-CRAMPING HARD-WORK on the part of those countless scribes in countless places for century after century after century after century!
All in favor of a comparatively TINY handful Egyptian Alexandrian manuscripts.
That is what Westcott-Hort do when they favor the ooh-la-la "Old" Alexandrian manuscripts over the Majority Text handed down to us by MILLIONS OF MAN-YEARS of scribal labors of love.
AFTERWRIT:
One more thing. The Eastern Orthodox oh-no-oh-no-oh-no "Tradition"...
tells us that Lucian of Antioch is the oldest deepest root father of the Majority Text family of manuscripts, and that he wrote the original "Master Copy" in the late 3rd century. Lucian was martyred on 7 January 312 under the last-ditch persecutions of Maximinus after enduring many tortures and defending his Belief to the last.
Now, Westcott - Hort rely upon the Alexandrian manuscripts, to wit, the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, both dating to ~350 CE.
Therefore, allegedly, according to pfah! "Tradition"...
The Eastern Orthodox Majority Text original Masters were actually older than the base texts (V&S) of W-H by about 75 years.
pfah! "Tradition". Tradition. Like, say, Matthew really wrote the Gospel attributed to him... and John was exiled to Patmos under Domitian... and the New Testament actually comes from the Messiah, really, trust me, it's "Tradition"....
How far do we want to go in dissing tradition, just wondering?
