Antioch or Byzantine?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by DeclareHim, Aug 25, 2004.

  1. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    My question is this simple 'Are the Byzantine mss the same as the Antioch mss (line) or are they differant?' :confused: [​IMG]

    1cross+3nails=4given [​IMG]
     
  2. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Has anyone actually established that there is such thing as an "Antioch line" of manuscripts? Because it strikes me as a KJV-only bit of fiction built up around Acts 11:26.
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Actually the Antioch v Alexandria was a bit of conjecture from WESTCOTT & HORT! Sorry I have long since lost the source of this quotation, but found it in my cyber-files!
     
  4. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK; however, it's not entirely clear to me whether it is Westcott and Hort who came up with the "Antioch line," or this author who is citing them.

    We could read this piece as saying, "To illustrate Westcott's point, let's suppose two texts were copied, one sent to Alexandria and the other to Antioch. . . ."
     
  5. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Very true. I've never found anyone who believes in a SEPARATE "Antioch" line except some radical onlies who gave no support.
     
  6. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting new double standard:

    Westcott & Hort are evil idiots when collecting
    Greek source texts; they are good geniuses when
    indentifying evil Alexandrian texts.
     
  7. KJVBibleThumper

    KJVBibleThumper
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wescott and Hort had so many other problems that why in the world would I trust them on this?
     
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually i consider them as
    good as the Anglican KJV translators (all 48
    of them). What you seem to "know" about them
    is one-sided and probably not true. I've
    read some of these anti-Wescott & Hort
    books and they seem to excell in partial
    quotes that are out of context.
    Nice thing about knocking Wescott & Hort
    is that they are dead and cannot defend
    themselves. Of course, the KJVO doesn't
    have that problem for the KJVO movement is
    so new they don't hardly have any dead greats.

    Token on-topic paragraph.
    The Antioch/Alexandria dichotomy smells
    of KJVOism bow to stern.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...