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
.20. 2Kgs 4:16 תע , ‘Time’, and ܝܬܢܐ , ‘You’
‘at this time, when you are living, you (will be) embracing a son’
‘at this appointed time, according to the time of life, you will embrace a son’
The phrases היחתעכ , ‘according to the time of
(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
considerable textual evolution even in
the later stages of transmission.
For a number of differences an alternative explanation in terms of lin-
guistically motivated changes could not be ruled out. Since the linguistic
research required to deal with these instances would go beyond the scope
of this study, the
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