ANDRAPODISTAIS:
> I would like some help from the Greek Geeks out there for the
> correct translation.


The question might be better suited for the bgreek list, but here is
what BDAG writes on the word:
------------
one who acquires pers. for use by others, slave-dealer, kidnapper 1 Ti
1:10 (here perh. w. the mng. 'procurer.' Vulg. plagiarius; s. New Docs
1, 50).
------------
The reference New Docs means: "New Documents Illustrating Early
Christianity", ed. GHorsley, vols. 1-5 1980/81-89;

BTW, "keep good relations with the Grecians." (G. W. Bush)
:-)

Best wishes
    Wieland
       <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

At 10:24 PM 5/25/2004 +0800, Jonathan Borland wrote:
>I think I understand the question.  How do we know that what exists is
>an accurate representation of the original?  I guess one explanation
>goes like this.

No, the question was about the stemma (the pattern of relationships
among the MSS), not the text of the archetype.

Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson                        mailto:scarlson@...
Weblog:    http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/hypotyposeis/blogger.html
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words."  Shujing 2.35

At 03:19 PM 5/25/2004 +0200, Wieland Willker wrote:
>Thought of the day:
>What if the amount of information is not sufficient enough to create the
>correct stemma? Of course we can only use what we have, but if we have
>not enough? If the input data are too fragmentary and incomplete then
>the resultant stemma probably has not much in common with
>reality/history.

Lack of data in cladistics usually leads to lack of resolution.  The
maximal lack of resolution is the bush pattern in which all extant
witnesses are believed to be descendent of some common ancestor but
there is not enough evidence to conclude that any two are more closely
related to each other.  For example, an unrealized bush with four
witnesses, A, B, C, and D, looks like:

           x
        / | | \
       A  B C  D

If a polychotomy in the stemma (i.e., a MS in the stemma with multiple
descendents) is interpreted as "soft", then the stemma is considered
correct as long as A, B, C, and D are actual descendents of x no matter
how they are further related to each other.  Thus, lack of data that
can specify in more detail the relationships among A, B, C, and D
would lead to a soft polychotomy.

However, if it can be determined that A and B agree in error more than
any other pair, the relationships in the stemma become more resolved
or distinct, such as:


            x
          / | \
         y  C  D
        / \
       A   B

There are well-accepted statistical techniques, namely the "bootstrap,"
that are commonly used for judging how much resolution in the stemma
is actually supported by the data.

>It could be checked using artificial data to show how much you need to
>get near the truth (how many "missing links" are allowed). The problem
>with NT TC is that we don't even know how much is lost.

People have done this.  Check out the last several years worth of issues
in the journals of _Systematic Biology_, _Cladistics_, etc.  There are
dozens and dozens of article on such statistical techniques.

Joe Felsenstein recently came out with a very nice textbook called INFERRING
PHYLOGENIES, which explains a lot of the theory and practice behind cladistics
(without getting too doctrinaire about it).  If your university supports a
decent biology/systematics/bioinformatics program, your library may already
have it.

Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson                        mailto:scarlson@...
Weblog:    http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/hypotyposeis/blogger.html
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words."  Shujing 2.35

> I think I understand the question.  How do we know that what exists
> is an accurate representation of the original?

No, not "original", but "history". How do we know that what exists is a
(tolerably) accurate representation of the textual history?
I think, simplified, we have a better understanding of what the original
is than what the history of the text is. And the creation of a stemma
is, IMHO, not so much an attempt to reconstruct the original, but to
reconstruct the HISTORY of the text and so to get a better justification
for the text we claim to be "the original".

Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

I think I understand the question.  How do we know that what exists is
an accurate representation of the original?  I guess one explanation
goes like this.

1. All copies came from somewhere.

2. When no variants occur, the probability is that all copies have
transmitted the original reading.  If this probability is not granted,
then NT Stemmatics really is a worthless venture, and so is all NT TC
for that matter.

3. When only one variant occurs against all the rest, the probability
is that it occurred in isolation and relatively late in the MS
tradition, so late that its descendants (also not extant), if any, were
unable to multiply the variant reading enough to impact the growing
numbers of the copies that contained the original reading.

4. If this kind of transmissional probability is granted, then
analyzing the evolution of variant units back to the optimal tree trunk
from which all branches and variant units emerged seems like a
worthwhile task.

And hopefully NT Stemmatics will start with all the branches and not
just a select few that are presupposed to be the best.  Otherwise it is
not a scientific exercise at all.

Jonathan Borland
Lakeland, FL


On May 25, 2004, at 9:19 PM, Wieland Willker wrote:

> Thought of the day:
>  What if the amount of information is not sufficient enough to create
> the
>  correct stemma? Of course we can only use what we have, but if we have
>  not enough? If the input data are too fragmentary and incomplete then
>  the resultant stemma probably has not much in common with
>  reality/history.
>  It could be checked using artificial data to show how much you need to
>  get near the truth (how many "missing links" are allowed). The problem
>  with NT TC is that we don't even know how much is lost.
>
>  Best wishes
>      Wieland
>         <><
>  ------------------------------------------------
>  Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
>  mailto:willker@...
> http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
>  Textcritical commentary:
> http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <lrec_companion_043004.gif>
> <l.gif>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>  •  To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/
>  
>  • 	 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>  
>  • 	 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>

ANDRAPODISTAIS:
> I would like some help from the Greek Geeks out there for the
> correct translation.


The question might be better suited for the bgreek list, but here is
what BDAG writes on the word:
------------
one who acquires pers. for use by others, slave-dealer, kidnapper 1 Ti
1:10 (here perh. w. the mng. 'procurer.' Vulg. plagiarius; s. New Docs
1, 50).
------------
The reference New Docs means: "New Documents Illustrating Early
Christianity", ed. GHorsley, vols. 1-5 1980/81-89;

BTW, "keep good relations with the Grecians." (G. W. Bush)
:-)

Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

Thought of the day:
What if the amount of information is not sufficient enough to create the
correct stemma? Of course we can only use what we have, but if we have
not enough? If the input data are too fragmentary and incomplete then
the resultant stemma probably has not much in common with
reality/history.
It could be checked using artificial data to show how much you need to
get near the truth (how many "missing links" are allowed). The problem
with NT TC is that we don't even know how much is lost.

Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

"For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for
menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any
other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine."

I am new to a new forum. I am uncertain if this question is relavent
to this forum, but if anyone would lend a hand it would be
appreciated.


Most translations of the Bible translate andrapodistes (sp)as
menstealer and kidnapper, but a few later user friendly(rated G)
translations use slave trader like NIV. NAB and NASB both use
kidnapper.

My understanding of this term was in reference to one who steals or
kidnaps slaves or possibly citizens. Slave ownership and trading was
a very legitamite business and very much a part of the Greek, Roman
and Hebrew world of the time.

I understood that this reference was in accordance with the Hebrew
law against the stealing of slaves and kidnapping punishable by
death in Exodus 21:16.

I would like some help from the Greek Geeks out there for the
correct translation.
_________________
Go with the flow the river knows

Frank

Turn weapons into peace and friendship with gifts of jade-silk

Jonathan Borland wrote:
>1. To find the optimum tree with the fewest changes, does this mean we
>should start with the evidence of all MSS from all ages and see what
>results as the mammoth perpetuation of original readings from which all
>erroneous readings emanated?

The determination of whether a reading is original or an error occurs
after the cladistic analysis rather than before.  It turns out that the
number of changes on a tree remains the same regardless of which
part of the tree is oriented to be the root (archetype).  However, the
number of changes on the tree is affected by the *shape* of the tree.
For example, a tree in which 33 is close to L, say, has fewer changes
on it (other things being equal) than one in which 33 is distantly
separated from L due to the relatively high number of agreements of
33 and L against other MSS.  If 33 and L are close together, then each of
their agreements need only imply one change on the tree rather than
two independent and coincidental changes on two different parts of
the tree.

>2. Do dates of MSS not really matter in cladistics, since basically all
>MSS had to be copied from earlier MSS, and it can be proven that some
>late MSS, like, e.g. 33, are related to some of the earliest MSS so far
>found?

Since the number of changes on a tree remains the same regardless
of how the tree is oriented, cladistics does not care about the dates
of MSS.  I suppose that if the dates of MSS closely match the shape
of the optimal tree (e.g. the tree shows a progression from early to
late MSS), one could use that information to decide fairly confidently
how the tree should be oriented, but the shape of the text is going to
be determined by the patterns of readings in the MSS, not by their
dates.

>3. Does cladistics give more credibility or "weight" to MSS that have a
>more continuous succession of non-deviation from the "optimum tree"
>than those that do not?  In other words, do MSS that perpetually
>deviate from the "optimum tree" receive a poor credibility rating
>(contra modern eclecticism), or is modern eclecticism allowed to stand?
>  If the latter, I'm wondering if NT stemmatics can maintain any
>reputation at all as a technical solution to NT TC.

Cladistics does not weigh MSS; rather, it seeks to find an arrangement
of MSS (i.e. a tree) that minimizes the number of changes implied by
the tree.  Once an optimal (unrooted) tree is found, one branch of it
can be selected for the location of the "root" or the Archetype.  After
the tree is rooted, it can be treated as a stemma and the stemmatic
history will, a posteriori, imply a certain weighting to the witnesses.

Cladistics tells us the shape of the optimal tree; other methods
have to be used to orient the tree so that the branch closest to
the autograph is on top.  The latter operation is not technically
part of the cladistic maximum parsimony analysis.  I suppose a
Byzantine prioritist and one who weighs the MSS in accordance
with modern eclectic praxis might disagree over where to locate
the root of the tree (i.e., near the Byzantine and Alexandrian
hyparchetypes, respectively), but at least they will be arguing
over the same basic shape of the transmissional history rather
than over completely different conceptions of it.

Cladistics is a method for producing a stemma and for that reason
can be thought of a subdiscipline within stemmatics.  Stemmatics
differs from modern eclecticism in that it postulates an explicit
history of the text (the stemma or family tree) from which readings
of ancestors can be reconstructed, and the choice of readings at
any place in the tree is constrained by that history.  This is how
stemmatics avoids the risk, raised by Maurice Robinson, inherent
in the approach of considering each variation unit in isolation of
each other, which could produce a text (a sequence of readings)
divorced from any historical pattern.  In actual practice, though,
the choice of readings  in modern eclecticism seems to follow B
and its relatives so closely over large stretches of text that the
risk of producing a historically unrealistic text is remote.  (Whether
that text constitutes the Archetype or merely a proto-Alexandrian
hyparchetype is a different question!)

Stephen Carlson

--
Stephen C. Carlson,
mailto:scarlson@...
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words."  Shujing 2.35

I have a few questions regarding NT stemmatics.  Stephen Carlson has a
short article with some links found here:

http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/tc/

Carlson's definition of NT stemmatics in a nutshell: "Cladistics
proceeds by  examining each point of variation to find the 'optimum
tree' with the fewest changes" (§14).  He goes on to say that
"cladistics does not require  prior knowledge of the original reading,"
which is nice, because we wouldn't need cladistics if we knew the
original reading.

So my questions are:

1. To find the optimum tree with the fewest changes, does this mean we
should start with the evidence of all MSS from all ages and see what
results as the mammoth perpetuation of original readings from which all
erroneous readings emanated?

2. Do dates of MSS not really matter in cladistics, since basically all
MSS had to be copied from earlier MSS, and it can be proven that some
late MSS, like, e.g. 33, are related to some of the earliest MSS so far
found?

3. Does cladistics give more credibility or "weight" to MSS that have a
more continuous succession of non-deviation from the "optimum tree"
than those that do not?  In other words, do MSS that perpetually
deviate from the "optimum tree" receive a poor credibility rating
(contra modern eclecticism), or is modern eclecticism allowed to stand?
   If the latter, I'm wondering if NT stemmatics can maintain any
reputation at all as a technical solution to NT TC.

Jonathan Borland
Lakeland, FL

Michael Welte confirms the following new Papyri:

P117
IV/V CE
2K 7,6-8; 7,9-11
Hamburg, Staats- u. Univ. Bibl., P.Hamb. Inv. NS 1002
M. Salvo: "Un nuovo frammento della seconda lettera di Paolo ai
Corinzi", Analecta papyrologica 13, 2001, 19-21


P118 (mentioned Fri on this list)
III CE
Rm 15,26-27.32-33; 16,1.4-7.11-12
Köln, Inst. für Altertumskunde, Inv. Nr. 10311
Compare:
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/NRWakademie/papyrologie/Karte/X_406
.html
Gesa Schenke "Epistula Pauli ad Romanos 15, 26-27.32-33; 16,
1.4-7.11-12" Kölner Papyri Vol. 10, 2003, p. 33-37

There are at least two interesting things about P118: 1. it is written
in two columns, which is quite rare for such an early codex and b) the
nomen sacrum ILLHM for IEROUSALHM.


I have updated my Papyri-list accordingly at:
http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/texte/Papyri-list.html

Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

Martin Arhelger wrote:
>> In Acts 3:20 the common reading has "appointed" (Greek
>> PROKECEIRISMENON).
>> But the Texts Receptus has "preached" (PROKEKHRUGMENON). This reading
>> of the Texts Receptus is different from the Majority-text. Is not
>> mentioned in the footnotes of Nestle-Aland.
>>
>> My question: What is the manuscript basis for the reading of the Textus
>> Receptus (if there is any)?

To which Stephen Carlson answered:
> Tischendorf says it is found in hardly any minuscules ("cum minusc vix"),
> which indicates to me that he looked and couldn't find any. The basis
> for the reading according to Tischendorf is QUI PRAEDICATUS EST in the
> Vulgate.

Tischendorf actually notes "cum minusc[ulis] vix mu[ltis]" ("with hardly
many minuscules"), but Stephen is correct on its  meaning: Tischendorf can
use it to express the fact that he did not find any Greek manuscript
source for a given reading.
The origin of PROKEKHRUGMENON is found in Erasmus' Novum Instrumentum
(1516). According to AJ Brown in volume VI-2 of Erasmus' Opera Omnia
(Amsterdam edition), PROKEKHRUGMENON is a pro-Vulgate conjectural
emendation made during the preparation of that first edition. It may have
been made by the proofreaders, for Erasmus writes in the second edition of
his Annotationes (see volume VI-6 a.h.l.), in 1519: 'In nonnullis
Graecorum exemplaribus pro PROKEKHRUGMENON scriptum erat PROKECEIRISMENON,
id est, praeparatum.’ The Greek text of his edition was not changed, not
even in later editions when the reading of the Complutensian Polyglot (the
normal PROKECEIRISMENON) had become known. Stephanus' first two editions
adopted the Complutensian reading, but Stephanus reverted to the Erasmian
reading in the third edition (1550), though in the small apparatus of that
edition it is indicated that "all" codices read PROKECEIRISMENON. Beza
mentioned this piece of information in his annotationes, but nevertheless
retained the Erasmian reading. It was finally taken over in the Elzevir
editions, and thus became a firm part of the Textus Receptus both on the
continent and "overseas".

Greetings,
Jan Krans
Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam

At 09:04 PM 5/15/2004 +0200, Martin Arhelger wrote:
> In Acts 3:20 the common reading has "appointed" (Greek PROKECEIRISMENON).
>But the Texts Receptus has "preached" (PROKEKHRUGMENON). This reading of the
>Texts Receptus is different from the Majority-text. Is not mentioned in the
>footnotes of Nestle-Aland.
>
>My question: What is the manuscript basis for the reading of the Textus
>Receptus (if there is any)?

Tischendorf says it is found in hardly any minuscules ("cum minusc vix"),
which indicates to me that he looked and couldn't find any.  The basis
for the reading according to Tischendorf is QUI PRAEDICATUS EST in the
Vulgate.

Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson                        mailto:scarlson@...
Weblog:    http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/hypotyposeis/blogger.html
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words."  Shujing 2.35

In Acts 3:20 the common reading has "appointed" (Greek PROKECEIRISMENON).
But the Texts Receptus has "preached" (PROKEKHRUGMENON). This reading of the
Texts Receptus is different from the Majority-text. Is not mentioned in the
footnotes of Nestle-Aland.



My question: What is the manuscript basis for the reading of the Textus
Receptus (if there is any)?



Thanks for help!



Martin Arhelger, Germany

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wieland Willker" <willker@...>
To: "Textualcriticism List" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 11:14 AM
Subject: [textualcriticism] New NT Papyrus from Cologne, P117?


> P. Koeln Inv. Nr. 10311
> 3. Jh. n.Chr.
> Romans 15, 26-27.32-33; 16, 1.4-7.11-12
>
> http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/NRWakademie/papyrologie/Karte/X_406
>
> Best wishes
>     Wieland
>       <><

3rd century?

Jack

Still more new papyri at:
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/NRWakademie/papyrologie/Karte/band1
0.html

I hope this makes your weekend! :-)
Homework: Reconstruct!

Best wishes
     Wieland
       <><
------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

P. Koeln Inv. Nr. 10311
3. Jh. n.Chr.
Romans 15, 26–27.32–33; 16, 1.4–7.11–12

http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/NRWakademie/papyrologie/Karte/X_406

Best wishes
     Wieland
       <><
------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR PAPYROLOGIE UND EPIGRAPHIK
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/index.html
(bottom, click on "Jahre" and then select a volume)
They note that the articles are free of charge "for the time being", so
better download them NOW.
There is not much directly concerning Biblical MSS, but many interesting
articles nonetheless.
Dealing directly with Biblical material note the following:

Enste, S., Qumran-Fragment 7Q5 ist nicht Markus 6,52-53
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1999/126pdf/126189.pd
f

van der Horst, P. W., Papyrus Egerton 5: Christian or Jewish?
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1998/121pdf/121173.pd
f

Schmelz, G., Septuaginta-Fragmente aus der Heidelberger  Papyrussammlung
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1997/116pdf/116061.pd
f

Hagedorn, D., Die 'Kleine Genesis' in P. Oxy. LXIII 4365
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1997/116pdf/116147.pd
f

Römer, C. E., Psalm 40,3-6 auf einem Wiener Papyrus (P. Vindob. G 14289)
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1996/114pdf/114056.pd
f

Vocke, H., Papyrus Magdalen 17 - weitere Argumente gegen die
Frühdatierung des angeblichen Jesus-Papyrus
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1996/113pdf/113153.pd
f

Emmel, S., Greek Biblical Papyri in the Beinecke Library
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1996/112pdf/112289.pd
f

Wachtel, K., P 64/67: Fragmente des Matthäusevangeliums aus dem 1.
Jahrhundert?
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1995/107pdf/107073.pd
f

Thiede, C. P., Papyrus Magdalen Greek 17 (Gregory-Aland P64). A
Reappraisal
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1995/105pdf/105013.pd
f

Skeat, T. C., The Origin of the Christian Codex
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1994/102pdf/102263.pd
f

Hagedorn, D., P. IFAO II 31: Johannesapokalypse 1,13-20
http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/zpe/downloads/1992/092pdf/092243.pd
f




Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

Liz Fried wrote:

> Is there a Peshitta?

Yes, there is, but it has not yet appeared in the critical edition by the
Peshitta Institute of Leiden (but the edition of 1[3] Ezra is available:
Heinrich Schneider, W. Baars and J. C. H. Lebram, The Old Testament in
Syriac According to the Peshitta Version, IV.6: Canticles or Odes - Prayer
of Manasseh - Apocryphal Psalms - Psalms of Solomon - Tobit - 1[3] Esdras,
Leiden, Brill, 1972). So you will have to resort to the images of ms 7a1
(Codex Ambrosianus), by the Biblical Manuscripts Project:

http://alpha.reltech.org:8083/cgi-bin/Ebind2html/BibleMSS/7a1

Also of use:

C. A. Hawley, A Critical Examination of the Peshitta Version of the Book of
Ezra (Contributions to Oriental History and Philology, 7), New York 1922;

C. Moss, "The Peshitta Version of Ezra", Le Muséon 46 (1933) 55-110;

R. L. Harris, The Peshitta to Nehemiah: A Textual-critical Analysis,
unpublished diss., Philadelphia 1947.

BTW, a complete and updated list of the editions of the extant witnesses to
the Hebrew Bible would be a vary valuable commodity. Does anyone know of
any project aiming at something like that?

Best wishes,
Giuseppe

--------------------------------------
Dr Giuseppe Regalzi, DR
Rome, Italy
regalzi@...
http://purl.org/net/regalzi/
http://www.orientalisti.net/

Hi textualcriticism

Lisbeth S. Fried, Ph. D.
>Hello, I'm Liz Fried and new to this group. I'm in the process of writing a
commentary on
>Ezra-Nehemiah for the Eerdmans Critical Commentary Series. How do I find out
what all the different versions are? There does not seem to be a Targum, and I
know nothing was found of these books from Qumran. I have 1st Esdras and the
LXX, and the Vulgate, and of course the passage from
>2 Chronicles. How do I find out what else is out there? Is there a Peshitta?

Schmuel
Hi Liz, I figgered I would get into this list at the very beginnings !

As far as I can see, from my limited perspective, you are well on top of these
things, keep in mind that the socalled LXX often has a large amount of
differentiation between its various competing manuscripts.

According to the DSS Bible there are three fragments of Ezra-Nehemiah from Ezra
4-6, that almost exactly match the Masoretic Text (four minor variants) .. that
at least counts as a good scholarship verification of the text against possible
LXX variants :-)

The Peshitta has all of Tanach.. the folks at www.peshitta.org are very, very
helpful in answering questions and sharing information (in my experience,
especially Paul Younan and Andrew Gabriel Roth).  My (vague) understanding is
that we may not have a full English translation other than Lamsa (the Peshitta
Tanach is rather neglected, while the NT has more scholarship and translations) 
And that it is generally a strong witness to the Masoretic Text (and perhaps
some extant manuscripts precede the extant MT manuscripts).  There are big
discussions about degrees of Jewish and Christian involvement in the Peshitta
Tanach translation, rather an interesting discussion.  Other good references can
be found through the "Journal for the Aramaic Bible"  http://www.targum.org/ ,
and the Syriac Institute.. http://www.bethmardutho.org/ as you likely know :-)

Hope that helps a bit, wish you well on your commentary project ! :-)

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Queens, NY


Schmuel@...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MessianicScriptures

There is a little bit of Ezra at Qumran: 4QEzra, edited by E. Ulrich in DJD
XVI (2000) 291f.

Stephen Goranson

At 11:20 AM 5/13/04 -0400, you wrote:

Liz,
I cant answer your question myself but Adrian Schenker, the chief editor of
Biblia Hebraica Quinta certainly can.  He is a warm and personable friend
and he is always happy to help out whenever he can.  His address-

adrian.schenker@...

he can communicate in German, French, or English.

and by the way, congratulations on your commentary!  I expect an autographed
copy!!!!!

Jim

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr Jim West
Pastor, Petros Baptist Church
http://biblical-studies.org   Biblical Studies Resources
http://biblical-studies.blogpspot.com  Biblical Theology Weblog

Dear All,
Hello, I'm Liz Fried and new to this group.
I'm in the process of writing a commentary on
Ezra-Nehemiah for the Eerdmans Critical Commentary
Series.
How do I find out what all the different versions are?
There does not seem to be a Targum, and I know nothing
was found of these books from Qumran. I have 1st Esdras
and the LXX, and the Vulgate, and of course the passage from
2 Chronicles. How do I find out what else is out there?
Is there a Peshitta?
Thanks,
Liz Fried

Lisbeth S. Fried, Ph. D.
Visiting Scholar
Department of Near Eastern Studies
University of Michigan
2068 Frieze Bldg.
105 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, Michigan  48109-1285

The following books might be of interest. The description is taken from
the publishers.


Rethinking the Gospel Sources: From Proto-Mark to Mark
by Delbert Royce Burkett
Paperback
Publisher: T & T Clark International; (September 2004)
ISBN: 0567025500
$35.00
Description
Burkett offers a fresh reading of the much-debated Synoptic Problem. He
contends that each theory regarding the Synoptic Problem is contentious.
Each presents a case for the mutual dependence of one source upon
another-for example, Matthew and Luke depend primarily on Mark, but use
each other where they report the same story not contained already in
Mark. Neither Mark nor Matthew nor Luke served as the source for the
other two, but all depended on a set of earlier sources now lost. The
relations between the Synoptic Gospels are more complex than the simpler
theories have assumed.

-------------------------------

The Original Language of the Lukan Infancy Narrative
by Chang-Wook Jung
Publisher: T & T Clark International;
October 2004
ISBN: 0567082059
hardcover
256 Pages
$105.00
SERIES: Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement
Description
It has long been recognized that the Greek of the Lukan infancy
narrative (chapters 1-2) displays numerous Semitic features.
Although the majority of recent scholarship assumes that such features
stem from an imitation of the Septuagint (imitation theory), the issue
has not been settled satisfactorily. Others argue that Luke probably
relied on a written source for the infancy narrative-or at least for
some parts of it-and that this source material was composed in imitation
of the Septuagint. Luke was not, however, merely the reviser or compiler
of his source; rather, he rewrote the source employing his own style and
language for his own purpose.
Here, Chang-Wook Jung examines the arguments most commonly put forward
by both sides and considers their merits.

-------------------------------

A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History,
Methods and Results
by Paul D. Wegner
List Price:   $17.00
Price:   $11.90
Edition: Paperback
Paperback: 208 pages
Publisher: Intervarsity Press; (September 2004)
ISBN: 0830827315
About the Book
The Bible has been on a long historical journey since its original
composition. Its texts have been copied and recopied. And despite the
most careful and painstaking efforts of scribes and publishers down
through the centuries, errors of one sort or another have crept in and
have been reproduced. Sorting out the errors and determining the
original wording is the task of textual criticism.
In fact, the task of textual criticism is so daunting and detailed that
it is divided between Old Testament textual critics and New Testament
textual critics. That is why nearly every book on the subject focuses on
the textual criticism of either the Old or New Testament. But if you are
one of those interested in a general understanding of textual criticism,
this book introduces you to textual criticism of the whole Bible--the
Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament.
In plain language and with ample illustration, Paul D. Wegner gives you
an overview of the history and methods, aims and results of textual
criticism. In the process you will gain an appreciation for the vast
work that has been accomplished in preserving the text of Scripture and
find a renewed confidence in its reliability.

-------------------------------

A Textlinguistic Analysis of Selected Old Testament Texts in Matthew 1-4
(Studies in Biblical Literature, 62)
by Jeffery L. Capshaw
List Price:   $63.95
Edition: Hardcover
Hardcover: 232 pages ; Dimensions (in inches): 0.75 x 9.00 x 6.00
Publisher: Peter Lang Publishing; (September 2004)
ISBN: 0820469076
Book Description
While providing exciting research opportunities, the New Testament's use
of the Old Testament continues to create interpretive difficulties.
Although Matthew's use of the Old Testament generated much scholarly
discussion throughout the historical-critical period, during the
contemporary period specific interest in Matthew's Old Testament usage
seemed to decrease. Recently, however, many powerful analytical
approaches have come to the fore in biblical studies, including various
text-centered methods such as textlinguistics (also known as discourse
analysis). This book applies one specific type of discourse grammar to
several Old Testament citations in Matthew's Gospel. This analysis is
presented both to initiate discussion and to show how this and similar
methods might be utilized to contribute important perspectives on the
New Testament's use of the Old Testament.

-------------------------------

Textual Criticism and the Synoptic Problem in Historical Jesus Research:
The Search for Valid Criteria (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and
theolo
by H. W. Shin
Hardcover
Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 36,
Leuven: Peeters, 2004 (forthcoming, August 2004)
ISBN: 904291470X
Rev. dr. H. W. Shin has written his dissertation "The Search for Valid
Criteria: Textual Criticism, the Synoptic Problem, and Historical Jesus
Research" in Amsterdam under the supervision of Prof. dr. Martinus C. de
Boer (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) and Prof. dr. Christopher M. Tuckett
(Oxford University). Now he is teaching at Westminster Graduate School
of Theology (Seoul) as a fulltime lecturer.

-------------------------------

Matthew's Bible: The Old Testament Text of the Evangelist
(Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, 173)
Not yet released.
Author: Prof. M. J. J. Menken,
Manufacturer: Peeters Publishing
Release Date: May, 2004
Media: Hardcover
ISBN: 904291419X
Expertise:   Exegesis of the Gospels; Use of the Old Testament in the
New Testament
Teaching: Exegesis of the writings of the New Testament, the history of
New Testament exegesis, and New Testament Greek

-------------------------------

The Collected Biblical Writings of T.C. Skeat
(Supplements to Novum Testamentum, V. 113)
Not yet released.
Author:T. C. Skeat, J. K. Elliott,
Release Date: July, 2004
Media: Hardcover
ISBN: 9004139206


Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

-----Mensagem original-----
De: Wieland Willker [mailto:willker@...]
Enviada: Domingo, 9 de Maio de 2004 9:57
Para: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
Assunto: RE: [textualcriticism] Epistle of Barnabas and TO 

 
You may want to look at page CLXXXV f.
Here also a reference is given:
J. Chapman, Revue Benedictine 30 (1913) 219-221

Best wishes
    Wieland
      <><
------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

Finally, someone starts again working on 2427!

http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0402/research/inv-mitchell.shtml


Best wishes
     Wieland
        <><
------------------------------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

Dear All,

In the introduction to his edition of D, Ropes, speaking of the Western Text
states : "It may have been used by the author of the Epistle of Barnabas"
(J. H. Ropes, The Text of Acts, Vol. III of B.C., p. ccxxiii).
Unfortunately, there is no reference to any study. Could anybody tell if
this possibility has been confirmed or not by subsequent studies?

Thanks a lot!

Greetings from the beautiful Algarve, Portugal

Philip Maertens

Raymond Regalado wrote:
> So, if I may, I'd like to pose a question or rather a request to the
list
> that perhaps someone familiar with Pierpont/Robinson could summarize
> their view for our benefit.

Have a look at:
http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn

and especially here:
http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn/ByzPrior.html
and here:
http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn/RobPier.html


Best wishes
     Wieland
       <><
------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html

On 2004.4.25, at 05:01  PM, Wieland Willker wrote:

> I invite you all to contribute interesting things in matters textual
> criticism of the Bible.

I have only recently started studying textual criticism seriously and
am looking forward to learning from those in the list.  I recently read
D.A. Carson's "The King James Version Debate" and it has pretty much
convinced me concerning the superiority of the "Critical Text"
approach.  Before reading Carson I was a TR/MT advocate -- a position I
held due to having been influenced by popular presentations of the
"theology of preservation" of the Greek Scriptures in the Majority Text
tradition, and the alleged corruption of the Alexandrian text type by
the likes of Origen (who was supposedly an Arian) etc.  Carson's book
dealt briefly with the "Origen as the source of the Alexandrian text"
argument.  I've also found articles by Dan Wallace in www.bible.org on
textual criticism helpful in dealing with the "theology of
preservation" argument.  Next on my reading list is J. Harold
Greenlee's "Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism".  Of
course I still have questions, my views are far from settled and that
is one reason I  joined this list.  One thing I feel I really have to
look into is the pro-MT view of Pierpont and Robinson, which is said to
be a more reasoned and scholarly defense of the MT position than what
is commonly available from the popular literature on the subject.  So,
if I may, I'd like to pose a question or rather a request to the list
that perhaps someone familiar with Pierpont/Robinson could summarize
their view for our benefit.  Thank you.

Warm Regards,

Raymond Regalado
Tokyo, Japan

Welcome to this list!
It is meant as a temporary replacement for the TC-list, which is not
working properly anymore.
I invite you all to contribute interesting things in matters textual
criticism of the Bible.

To make thinks short, there will be only one rule: If something
escalates I will intervene.


Best wishes
     Wieland
       <><
------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
mailto:willker@...
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
Textcritical commentary:
http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html