[ David Strauss ] [ Semler ] [ VON SODEN - AVAILABLE ] [ Lachmann ] [ F.C. Baur ] [ NKJV Hodges&Farstad MT ] [ Knowing W & H - Conclusions ] [ Wettstein ] [ Gerhard Kittel ] [ Tischendorf 1 ] [ The Unbound Scriptures - A Biblical Critique - Part 1 ] [ The Unbound Scriptures - Critique - Pt 2 ] [ The Unbound Scriptures - Critique - Pt 3 ] [ textual criticism newtestament1 ] [ textual criticism newtestament2 ] [ UBS Red Cover NT ] [ DeWette ] [ GRIESBACH ] [ Majority Text ] [ Bengel ] [ Von Soden ] [ Kittel & His Version ] [ Kittel and the O.T. ] [ Miles Coverdale ] [ Westcott & Hort ]

TEXTUAL CRITICISM 101

Scofield Never Agreed with Westcott and Hort

His critical edition of the New Testament first appeared at Halle, in three volumes, in 1774—1775. The first volume contained the first three Gospels, synoptically arranged; the second, the Epistles and the book of Revelation. All the historical books were reprinted in one volume in 1777, the synoptical arrangement of the Gospels having been abandoned as inconvenient. Of the second edition, considerably enlarged and improved, the first volume appeared in 1796 and the second in 1806 (Halle and London). Of a third edition, edited by David Schulz, only the first volume, containing the four Gospels, appeared (1827).

For the construction of his critical text Griesbach took as his basis the Elzevir edition. The Elzevir edition of the Greek New Testament is simply the Textus Receptus (and one of the Two Greek Texts to have been designated this way). Where he differed from it he placed the Elzevir reading on the inner margin along with other readings lie thought worthy of special consideration (these last, however, being printed in smaller type). To all the readings on this margin he attached special marks indicating the precise degree of probability in his opinion attaching to each. In weighing these probabilities he proceeded upon a particular theory which in its leading features he had derived from J. A. Bengel and J. S. Semler, dividing all the MSS. into three main groups—the Alexandrian, the Western and the Byzantine . A reading supported by only one recension he considered as having only one witness in its favour; those readings which were supported by all the three recensions, or even by two of them, especially if these two were the Alexandrian and the Western, he unhesitatingly accepted as genuine. Only when each of the three recensions gives a different reading does he proceed to discuss the question on other grounds. (and these are discussed in his own notes, not within his mangled Greek new testament, so that readers were forced to rely on the judgement of Griesbach, who already denied the authenticity of the Bible and was a follower of Bengel and Semler). 

See his Symbolae criticae ad supplendas et corrigendas variarum N.T. lectionum collectiones (Halle, 1785, 1793), and his Commentarius criticus in textum Graecum N. T., which extends to the end of Mark, and discusses the more important various readings with great care and thoroughness (Jena, 1794 if.). Among the other works of Griesbach (which are comparatively unimportant) may be mentioned his university thesis De codicibus quatuor evangelislarum Origenianis (Halle, 1771) and a work upon systematic theology (Anleitung zur Kenntniss der popularen Dogmatik, Jena, 1779). His Opuscula ,consisting chiefly of university "Programs" and addresses, were edited by Gabler (2 vols., Jena, 1824).

Sources: Ravenous Wolves: Textual Criticism and the Abandonement of the Reformation- A History of HIgher Criticism and German Theology by Lichtenberger. In addition, the works of the subjects of this biography, and Early Editions of Ency. Brit.