scientific principles - the science of textual criticism. Having examined the methods and conclusions of those of the Westcott-Hort and the Eclectic schools of textual criticism, this author concludes that such is not science.1

For example, in Mark 5-16, Epp records that the Uncial Codex W shows a 34 percent agreement with B, 36 percent with D, 38 percent with the TR, and 40 percent with Aleph.2 As Pickering correctly asks: "To which 'textual stream' should W then be assigned?"3 Yet Codex W has been given a family assignment. Is not any such assignment clearly a matter of conjecture as well as a convenience in order to support a preconceived tenet?

Furthermore, both P-66 and P-75 have been generally endorsed as belonging to the "Alexandrian text-type."4 A.F.J. Klijn catalogs the results of a comparison of A, B, P-45, P-66, and P-75 in the passages where they are all extant (i.e., John 10:7-25, 10:32-11:10, 11:19-33 and 11:43-56).5 He considered only those places where A and B disagree and where at least one of the papyri joins either A or B. Klijn stated the result for the 43 places as follows (to which we have added figures for the Textus Receptus as given on p. 55 in and by Pickering.):

Number of Agreements with:
Aleph B Textus Receptus
P-45 19 24 32
P-66 14 29 33
P-75 9 33 29
P-45,66,75 4 18 20
P-45,66 7 3 8
P-45,75 1 2 2
P-66,75 0 8 5

Is the summary assignment of P-66 and P-75 to the "Alexandrian text-type" entirely reasonable? Is this "science", factual or truthful? Moreover, Gordon D. Fee goes to considerable lengths in interpreting the evidence in such a way as to support his conclusion that "P-66 is basically a member of the Neutral tradition",6 but the evidence itself as he records it (for John chapters 1-14) is:7

1 Over a 14 year professional career during which he held varying positions of responsibility as Paleontologist, Geophysicist, District Geophysicist, Geophysical Manager, and Regional Geophysicist with Texaco and Tenneco respectively, the author is qualified to make such a judgment. Shortly before resigning from his scientific career in 1974 to pursue Biblical studies, he was selected to attend Division Manager School. Having attained a Ph.D as well as a Th.D., Dr. Jones has garnered majors in the disciplines of Geology, Chemistry, Mathematics, Theology, and Education from six different institutions of higher learning. A Magna Cum Laude graduate and an ex-evolutionist, he also possesses a minor in Physics and is an ordained Minister (SBC). Having twice served as adjunct Professor at Continental Bible College in Brussels, Belgium, Dr. Jones is currently engaged in ongoing Biblical research and the teaching of God's infallible Word.

2 Epp, "The Twentieth Century Interlude in New Testament Textual Criticism", op. cit., pp. 394-396.

3 Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text, op. cit., p. 55.

4 Ibid.

5 Klijn, A Survey of the Researches into the Western Text, op. cit., pp. 45-48. 6 Gordon D. Fee, Papyrus Bodmer II (P66): Its Textual Relationships and Scribal Characteristics, (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1968), p. 56.

7 Ibid., p. 14.

93


continued...