11 months ago

Hort's theory of the Lucianic Recension and various scholars' reactions to it.

In minute 18, Rabbula was bishop of Edessa from 411-435, not 411-475.

1:30 - Theories of recensions before Hort
2:45 - Conflations in the Byzantine Text - combinations of Alexandrian and Western readings
4:00 - Patristic usage of distinctly Byzantine readings post-date 300
5:00 - Internal considerations
5:45 - Hort's categorical rejection of uniquely Byzantine readings
7:00 - Hort's advocacy of readings shared by Vaticanus and Sinaiticus
7:45 - Hort's loaded nomenclature such as "Neutral Text" and "Western non-interpolations"
9:00 - Scrivener and Burgon did not advocate Hort's transmission-model
10:15 - 5,600 differences between the Textus Receptus and the revised Greek Text - 3,600 impact English translation
11:00 - Nestle's compilations
11:56 - The 1897 Oxford Debate and Burkitt's 1901 analysis of Ephrem's Gospels-quotations
14:00 - Hort's assertion that the Byzantine Text was the dominant text of the late 300s
15:00 - The Peshitta: from the 100s or the 300s?
19:00 - British & Foreign Bible Society begin to print Nestle's compilation
20:00 - Developments after the 1881 Revised Text - J.R. Harris, Ciasca, Kirsopp Lake
21:00 - Von Soden's compilation and its (exaggerated) defects
22:00 - New handbooks: Gregory, Nestle, Kenyon, Souter, Lake
23:00 - Burgon's alternative: improve academic resources before attempting to revise the text
25:00 - Hort's theory was represented as a fact by Gregory, Souter and Metzger (still asserted in 2005)