Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I have been formally engaged in lower criticism of the Greek text for over 3 decades, have published 5 large volumes on the Syriac New Testament and Greek New Testament and still do not fathom the marketing verbiage associated with this, Metzger's standard volume. To state that some great fall from a textual tradition occurred in past textual transmissions is simply without evidence. That Bart Ehrman, the Dan Brown of lower criticism, is now associated with this excellent text is yet another reason to begin abandoning the tome in favor of more objective resources. I suggest going back to B.F. Westcott's History of the Canon... or to FF Bruce. Both far greater scholars than Ehrman. For all its value, Metzger is no longer an objective treatise but is rather based on an a-priori assumption of human need to restore a text that was never lost; an historical and evidentially false premise and unabashed tool for promoting the "need" for one's own publications. In my undergrad when performing a exhaustive Claremont Profile of variations in the Synoptics, (Using SCE Legg, and all lower textual treastises), I learned from nearly every tradition of text that variations were not historically cyclical, bore no pattern of misguided or mal-intent, nor did they appear to be theologically driven. These things were evident in the peudopigrapha but not in the transmissional text of the NT. Most variants were Atticisms, (in an attempt to produce a refined "Greek" translational form using Koine as a basis), simple conjugation errors, connective, eyesight errors, (dittography), and common mis-spelling errors. Ehrman's fantastical leaps of textual causes rest solely in his desire to sell greater volumes, but not in fact. That Ehrman is now associated with this text should come as a warning to those of us who respect the objective science of textual analysis. I now say no to this tome until Bart Ehrman is removed from it. XAPIS KAI EIPHNH.