# Farstad & Hodges Vs. Robinson & Pierpont



## A S (Jun 5, 2009)

Which majority texts of these two groups are better? And why.

And can somebody please explain the differences in the approach between these two groups? I always get lost when trying to understand the differences. I understand they are both in favor of a majority text, but the question is "what is the majority text?" So please explain what sets these two groups of majority text advocates apart.

Lastly, what is it that makes someone take a jump from majority text to textus receptus?

Ok Thanks.

Adam


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jun 5, 2009)

Hello Adam,

The first section of the Introduction of Robinson and Pierpont's (R&P) work talks about the differences.

Another source is Bibliography of Textual Criticism "P". Scroll down to "Pierpont and Robinson, 1991" to read the pertinent paragraph.

Here are Hodges and Farstad reviewing R&P: Going for the Gold.

Here in a nutshell is what "makes someone take a jump from majority text to textus receptus": http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/responding-james-white-aomin-44382/#post557693.

And here are some links to an irenic defense of the TR / KJV position: http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/jerusalem-blades-posts-partial-compilation-48676/.

Welcome to PB!

Steve


----------



## A S (Jun 5, 2009)

Great, thanks. This is is exactly the kind of information I was looking for... And it is difficult to find all in the same place!

And just curious... What do you do with people who argue that the eclectic text is the best because 1. it's oldest. 2. it's in the old latin and old syriac. (and dispersed abroad). and 3. it's quoted by the early church fathers? Are these three arguments not extremely weighty? 

One more thing: Can someone please tell me what a waldensian Bible is? And it's significance. And the same question I also have about the old italic translation. And how important are these two translations in comparison with the old latin and old syriac?

Finally, what about Jerome's vulgate? Did he know things on textual matters that we do not know? Should we also look to his vulgate for help?

Thanks.

Anybody with more info and resource links on these topics would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jun 7, 2009)

Adam,

In the midst of a busy schedule, I take a little time to give some directions to take to find answers to your questions:

Waldenses and the Bible

Nolan on Italick version and Waldenses, post #5 in the http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/johannine-comma-37481/#post465749 thread. Look toward the end of the post.

Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible - Introduction and Table of Contents

I'm sorry I don't take time to answer you personally at this point, but instead steer you to where answers are. Sort of like the proverb, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. _Teach_ a man to fish and you feed him for life."

Hope this helps!

Steve


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jun 7, 2009)

P.S. Some links to steer you to eclectic text discussions:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/answering-alan-kurschner-aomin-24839/

Post #23 of http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/history-authorized-version-31573/#post389294

An extended discussion of eclectic text issues in this thread: http://www.puritanboard.com/f63/verbal-plenary-preservation-21765/

As you go through these and some of the above-listed threads, you will find in the discussions / debates a lot of relevant material on your various questions.

Steve


----------

