tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post3268380796265262200..comments2024-03-20T12:35:12.828-04:00Comments on The Text of the Gospels: Nestle-Aland in Matthew 28: Alexandrian or Eclectic?James Snapp Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-2321001632754358502017-01-05T12:25:19.138-05:002017-01-05T12:25:19.138-05:00I think it could be defensively stated that the KJ...I think it could be defensively stated that the KJV-1611 has a much broader textual base in Greek and versional manuscripts than does the NA-28 GNT.Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-231602870723180052017-01-05T12:20:59.949-05:002017-01-05T12:20:59.949-05:00NA most definitely is an eclectic text; it is ecle...NA most definitely is an eclectic text; it is eclectically drawn from the texts of B and Aleph (A in Revelation), with occasional resort to D, L, and a minuscule or two where those three do not supply a reading. So yes, the "eclectic" compilation, though its supporters boast is based on over five thousand Greek manuscripts, is actually based on about five manuscripts. Readings found in as many as 3000 other manuscripts are routinely ignored whenever they differ from the united testimony of B and Aleph. <br /><br />The most embarrassing thing about "the embarrassment of riches" that is the body of NT manuscripts is the almost total rejection of these riches when it comes to a compilation of the NT Greek text.Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-66345629869915925412017-01-04T20:35:51.926-05:002017-01-04T20:35:51.926-05:00"99.5% of the Nestle-Aland compilation can be..."99.5% of the Nestle-Aland compilation can be reconstructed without consulting 99.5% of the manuscripts"<br /><br />What edition would this not be true for? Pick any edition and I bet you could reconstruct it with only a handful of manuscripts. You seem to be confusing the eclectic <em>method</em> with something more like heterogeneous <em>results</em>. But unless an edition starts picking a lot of singular readings, I don't see how any edition could achieve what you seem to be calling "eclectic." Could define this term clearly for us so we know what you are claiming the NA is <em>not</em>.Peter Gurryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10396444437216746412noreply@blogger.com