From: Eric Weiss (eweiss@gte.net)
Date: Wed Dec 10 1997 - 12:12:25 EST
White's response to Gail Riplinger's New Age Bible Versions can be found
at:
http://www.bible.org/docs/theol/biblio/riplnger.htm
Gail Riplinger's response to White's critique of New Age Bible Versions
can be found at
http://www.av1611.org/othpubl.html
under the link entitled Gail Riplinger's Response to James White's
Critique of New Age Bible Versions [ Part 1 ] [ Part 2 ] [Part 3 ] [
Part 4 ] [Part 5 ] [ Part 6 ] [ Part 7 ]
In Part 5 (and maybe elsewhere) of her work, Gail makes some damning
charges about the critical apparatus in NA 27, UBS4 and Hodge's Majority
text, claiming that von Soden's work, which these texts apparently rely
upon for their basis and listing of variants, is seriously flawed,
omitting many important manuscripts. Is anyone out there with a good
knowledge of textual criticism able to refute or support Gail's charges?
I can deal with translation issues, but I have no knowledge or training
for grappling with textual criticism issues. Because of what I perceive
to be grievous problems with other things Riplinger argues, I'm hesitant
to accept what she(?) says about the textual issues, but if she is
correct in this, I'd like to know.
-- "Eric S. Weiss" eweiss@gte.net http://home1.gte.net/eweiss/index.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:36 EDT