What do you think?
Rate this book
The Byzantine text-type and New Testament textual criticism
Book is in Used-Good condition. Pages and cover are clean and intact
305 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1984
2 people are currently reading
31 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
May 1, 2020
A simply phenomenal book. Sturz's work (which is the publication of his thesis together with extensive supplementary material) is a reasoned and reasonable argument that modern New Testament textual critics have been too quick to relegate the Byzantine text-form to the status of second class citizen.
Sturz avoids the temptation to simplistically pick sides and argues against the view that the Byzantine text must be secondary and thus generally rejected (the view of Westcott & Hort, and the majority of modern critical scholars) as well as the view that the Byzantine text must be primary and thus generally received (Dean Burgon, Zane Hodges, and Maurice Robinson, et al). Instead, Sturz argues that the kind of reasoned eclectic method advocated by the first group should be pursued but that the Byzantine text should be recognized as an independent and valuable witness to early readings. He supports this contention by providing a helpful overview to the debate, an evenhanded critique of both schools, and a rigorous argument for his own position. He draws heavily on the papyri discoveries of the last century and gives careful responses to the common arguments raised against the Byzantine text. Each chapter is short and focused. His argument is exceptionally easy to follow while being undeniably well researched and well documented.
Out of the 300 pages of the book, only the first 130 or so pages are actually used to state his argument. The rest of the book is carefully compiled data designed to prove it. This book (now out of print, sadly, and hard to find) is a gem and offers a nuanced and helpful way forward through the gridlock between the advocates of the Alexandrian and Byzantine texts.
Sturz avoids the temptation to simplistically pick sides and argues against the view that the Byzantine text must be secondary and thus generally rejected (the view of Westcott & Hort, and the majority of modern critical scholars) as well as the view that the Byzantine text must be primary and thus generally received (Dean Burgon, Zane Hodges, and Maurice Robinson, et al). Instead, Sturz argues that the kind of reasoned eclectic method advocated by the first group should be pursued but that the Byzantine text should be recognized as an independent and valuable witness to early readings. He supports this contention by providing a helpful overview to the debate, an evenhanded critique of both schools, and a rigorous argument for his own position. He draws heavily on the papyri discoveries of the last century and gives careful responses to the common arguments raised against the Byzantine text. Each chapter is short and focused. His argument is exceptionally easy to follow while being undeniably well researched and well documented.
Out of the 300 pages of the book, only the first 130 or so pages are actually used to state his argument. The rest of the book is carefully compiled data designed to prove it. This book (now out of print, sadly, and hard to find) is a gem and offers a nuanced and helpful way forward through the gridlock between the advocates of the Alexandrian and Byzantine texts.
August 25, 2022
I am very glad that this book came back into print. Anyone interested in New Testament Textual Criticism ought to read this and wrestle with the ideas set forth.
December 16, 2012
Amazingly good book
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews