source document, Kannaday posits that scribes performed a systematic reworking of the transmissional lines.
However, Kannaday claims there was no such systematic work. Even if there is some credence to the claim concerning apologetically motivated scribal alterations, it was in no way systematic
(to AD 300) has long been recognized as ‘wild,’ ‘uncontrolled,’ ‘unedited.’ ” 23
The wild development supposedly ended with a textual standardization motivated by ecclesiastical powers. As Parker explains, “the growth of influence of a number of key sees, particularly Antioch, Alexandria
the original words of the New Testament.” 83 The two scholars contended the many new finds and transcriptions by Tischendorf had thoroughly supplanted the late date of the mss. used to create the TR . The new material motivated and warranted creating a new text independent of the TR . 84