Gideon Kruger and his Lamentation research of Qumran Lamentation compared to the Masoretic Hebrew text is just an example of how conventional Text Critics are thinking.

---They try to be eclectic.

---They do not like the Standard Text Method. The Method that chooses one text as primary and all others as secondary.

---They try to pull down the Hebrew consonantal text of the Masoretic Tradition as favorite primary text.

---They want all texts to be placed on an equal level and then pick and choose their way out of it.

---Result? They speak with three or four tongues at the same time.

---For example, if you say the form of the text is the result of slips or human errors, then you cannot also argue that the form of the text was deliberately interpreted to present some kind of ideology or different message. Can you see the dilemma? I can.

---So what is the solution? The consonantal text of the Hebrew of the Masoretic Tradition is the very Word of God and primary and this Standard Text is the norm to test all other forms of secondary texts of the translations of this text.

---How do we know that the Hebrew consonantal text is primary and all others secondary?

---The key to know that is that 4QDana, the Qumran Daniel fragments in form and content are 99.9% the same as the consonantal text of the Masoretic Tradition dating to Codex Aleppo in 1008 AD. This kind of accuracy over such a long period is unrivaled and very, very rare. Why? Because that form is the very Word of God. Which form? The consonantal Hebrew text of Codex Aleppo. Proved to be the same at Qumran in one fragment and that one fragment is enough evidence. Period.

---Is your professor telling you that we are not sure about the proper text of the Word of God? Time to dig in to libraries and learn about the confusion of patristics of conventional Textual Criticism. And find the true way about that science.

---Drop the eclectic method and get back to the Standard Norm Method with the consonantal text of the Masoretic tradition as primary Word of God.

---Is it not just a jump in faith or belief? Yes, with 4QDana evidence as proof. If one is correct maybe all are correct.

---Is doubt of the eclectic method void of beliefs? No. Every text cited are more than 500 years and more from the original authors anyway. Also a case of believing a lot of things, of connecting dots over a long period in the absence of data. No difference.

---The only difference between the eclectic method of textual criticism and the standard text method of textual criticism is that the first one is sowing nihilism, agnosticism, atheism, and doubt in religion but the standard text method of textual criticism is maintaining and upholding the Word of God as primary role in the believers’ life.

---Willing to get back to the truth?