James,

thank you for trying to answer my unclear question. The exchange with
Jan Krans made me aware of the weakness of a particular edition,
reproduced in Migne, which came as no big surprise, but was very
helpful since Krans had concrete evidence that this edition was flawed,
and the data was confirmed by my own observations in Jude.

Nevertheless, my original question remains, but I will try to explain
it again: when I was dealing with a passage in a father, I noted in a
recent edition a footnote saying that the citation in question (from
Jude) is "missing in the text." The older edition available in Migne
has part of the same citation (but not all) in brackets, but not any
note that explains why. I am generally curious of the different
editorial practices that must be reflected in Migne's PG. I haven't had
time to examine Migne or read other's assessments in detail, although I
am very aware of the general critique. I am especially interested in
the footnotes in PG, and the question to what extent Migne himself was
responsible for any critical notes in relation to manuscript evidence
and editorial practice.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University
Sweden


2006-10-17 kl. 07.12 skrev James Snapp, Jr.:

> T.W.,
>
>  I'm not sure if this is the sort of thing you're looking for, but in
>  the Ancient Christian Writers series, the vol. on Methodius (#27),
>  translated and annotated by H. Musurillo, a note on p. 191, about the
>  text of Methodius' "Symposium" on p. 46, states:
>
>  "Here the Migne text (Combefis), followed by many editors, has 'of
>  the many patriarchs and many prophets and righteous men,' but the
>  words 'of the many patriarchs' are not in the MSS OP and derive from
>  an insert in the text of M..."
>
>  And in a note on p. 195:
>  "There is a curious clause found here in the Migne (Combefis)
>  edition, 'prepared channels for the blood a a tender windpipe for the
>  breath,' but it is found only in codex M, which here offers a
>  conjecture for words which were illegible in O, and is certainly not
>  authentic."
>
>  And a few other notes express similar sentiments about other passages.
>
>  Yours in Christ,
>
>  James Snapp, Jr.
>  Curtisville Christian Church
>  www.curtisvillechristian.org/BasicTC.html
>  Indiana (USA)
>
>
>

Sorry to take so long to answer. I subscribe to the digest, so
everything is delayed.

Yes, Hal is right, there are howlers, but the major one that I was
referring to was on page 274 where he states the Diatessaron was created
about A.D. 70 (it should be 170).

HTH,

James

________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for over 30 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788

Posted by: "Peter M. Head" pmh15@....uk petermh2004
Date: Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:24 am (PDT)

So what is the major howler?

At 13:43 13/10/2006, James wrote:

>"A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History,
>Methods & Results"
>by Paul D. Wegner
>InterVarsity Press - IVP, 2006
>334 pages, English, Paper
>ISBN: 0830827315
>List Price: $18.00
>
>Aside from 1 major howler, it is pretty balanced. It deals with both
>Hebrew Bible and Greek New Testament in one volume.

Peter M. Head, PhD
Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
Tyndale House
36 Selwyn Gardens
Cambridge CB3 9BA
01223 566601

Dear list,

I am trying to locate a passage in the Jerusalem Talmud which says that
it is permitted to recite Ps. 91 (and Ps. 3) as a protection against
approaching evil. This question has to do with the use of Ps 91
(masoretic) for apotropaic purposes. There are many manuscripts with
this text, which have been used as amulets. I would be very grateful
for help with this reference.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University

Hal,

Yes, I noted some of those (although not nearly as many) when I
commented on it on my blog. Part of the problem is that the book was
originally slated for publication in 2004 and didn't actually get
published until 2 year later. It appears no one went back and checked
the references in the earlier sections. I suspect that the manuscript
had been in production for long before IVP got it, and didn't get
adequate editorial attention, hence the unevenness. Another thing I
noticed was the different fonts used through out the book; perhaps
trivial to some, but indicative of the lack of checking that appears to
have happened. Maybe these things will be corrected in a second
printing?  Anybody from IVP out there?

James

________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for over 30 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788


2a. Re: new in the area
     Posted by: "Harold P. Scanlin" harold.scanlin@... harold37s
     Date: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:02 pm (PDT)

James,

Thanks for noting the wrong date. That one wasn't on my list. Here are a

few of mine.

Wegner (p. 31) cites Deist's first work on t.c. His renamed second
edition, /Witnesses to the Old Testament /(Pretoria: NGKB, 1988 adds a
great deal of new information, including a closing chapter on "The task
and method of Old Testament textual criticism."

Page 102 says only two volumes have been published in HUBP; page 112
correctly says there are three.

CD Ginsburg is incorrectly given as the author of Darlow & Moule's
Historical Catalog [of BFBS].

Wegner uses the first edition of Tov's introduction, though he cited the

2nd edition elsewhere. Tov's revised edition makes a subtitle but very
important modification of the very point under discussion in Wegner,
namely the issue of Ur-text/original text and the recoverability of the
"best" text.

Wegner does not use the latest edition of Wuerthwein. Use of this
earlier edition is less problematic than Diest or Tov, but a book for
students of t.c. should surely make use of the latest editions.

On p. 112 the HUBP edition of Isaiah is said to be in 2 volumes. I think

it appeared originally in three fascicles, but it should be cited in the

one volume edition of 1995.

On p. 118 Weil's /Masssorah Gedolah/ is described as "a diplomatic
edition of the ... B19A manuscript..." It's a very important, if
incomplete, work on the masora of B19A, but it certainly isn't a
diplomatic edition of anything. Weil was actually a "latter-day"
masorete himself, supplementing the masora of B19A with additional
masoretic material.

On the same page Wegner cites the original edition of Ginsburg's /The
Masorah , /not the KTAV reprint with a very important new Prolegomenon
by Aron Dotan. The new introductions in most of the KTAV reprints
generally provide valuable updates on the state of research in the
relevant topics. Curiously, he cites on the very same page the KTAV
reprint editions for two other Ginsburg works, though without mentioning

the new Introductions/Prolegomena.

Page 158 lists only the Makor facsimile edition of B19A. The mediocre
quality of this facsimile is well known. the student should be made
aware of the excellent new facsimile edition from Brill/Eerdmans.

I'm working on a longer list if problems, some of which may be
considered mere quibbles, but the items mentioned here should
demonstrate that, despite some of the pedagogically useful features of
Wegner, the book currently should be considered a very unreliable guide
for students.

Hal Scanlin

None exists that I know of.  I looked a few months back because I too
was working (and still am) on Ben Sira.  But if by chance something has
come online in the last little while I'd like to know of it as well.


Jim Darlack wrote:
> I’m going to be doing some TC stuff in Sirach, and I was wondering if
> anyone knew of a machine readable (electronic) text of Sirach in Hebrew
> and in Syriac.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
--
Jim West, ThD

http://web.infoave.net/~jwest  -- Biblical Studies Resources
http://drjimwest.wordpress.com  -- Weblog

Dear Listmembers,

The beginning of Acts 2, 14 according to the Codex Bezae reads:
TOTE STAQEIS DE O PETROS

According to the NA27, TOTE figures also in the Peshitta and the Coptic
(mae). Boismard, in his reconstruction of the Western text (“Le Texte
Occidental des Actes des Apôtres”, 2000) mentions the same witnesses, while
Ropes (“The Text of Acts” BC I, Vol III, 1926), writing before the discovery
/ publishing of the Coptic codex G67, mentions only the Peshitta.
Tischendorf seems only to admit a certain resemblance between the reading of
D and the reading of the Peshitta: “Similiter TOTE adponit Syrsch”. Clark,
on the other hand, renders the reading of the Peshitta with KAI META TAUTA
STAQEIS.

So, should I follow the “majority” and place the Peshitta with the Codex
Bezae? But of course, we don’t count witnesses but “weight” them. From a
qualitative point of view, one cannot easily ignore the editors of the NA27
or Ropes. On the other hand, since Clark put TOTE in his text, the support
of the Peshitta would have been useful for him. So, why is his reading of
the Peshitta is different from the others? Perhaps both the “majority” and
Clark rely on Tischendorf, representing each a different understanding of
“similiter TOTE adponit” (speculation: my Latin is not good enough :-)). In
the case of the “majority”, they would stress the similarity between the
readings of D and the Peshitta, to the point of identity, while Clark would
attach himself to the difference.

Briefly put, what is the reading of the Peshitta, and how should I
understand Tischendorf?

(rainy) greetings from the Algarve, Portugal
Philip Maertens

I have written on the precarious nature of Syriac support for Greek TOTE in
my _Early Syriac Translation Technique and the Textual Criticism of the
Greek Gospels_ (Gorgias Press, 2004), pp. 170-73.

Best wishes,

P.J. Williams

At 10:10 19/10/2006 +0100, you wrote:

>Dear Listmembers,
>
>The beginning of Acts 2, 14 according to the Codex Bezae reads:
>TOTE STAQEIS DE O PETROS
>
>According to the NA27, TOTE figures also in the Peshitta and the Coptic
>(mae). Boismard, in his reconstruction of the Western text (“Le Texte
>Occidental des Actes des Apôtres”, 2000) mentions the same witnesses, while
>Ropes (“The Text of Acts” BC I, Vol III, 1926), writing before the discovery
>/ publishing of the Coptic codex G67, mentions only the Peshitta.
>Tischendorf seems only to admit a certain resemblance between the reading of
>D and the reading of the Peshitta: “Similiter TOTE adponit Syrsch”. Clark,
>on the other hand, renders the reading of the Peshitta with KAI META TAUTA
>STAQEIS.
>
>So, should I follow the “majority” and place the Peshitta with the Codex
>Bezae? But of course, we don’t count witnesses but “weight” them. From a
>qualitative point of view, one cannot easily ignore the editors of the NA27
>or Ropes. On the other hand, since Clark put TOTE in his text, the support
>of the Peshitta would have been useful for him. So, why is his reading of
>the Peshitta is different from the others? Perhaps both the “majority” and
>Clark rely on Tischendorf, representing each a different understanding of
>“similiter TOTE adponit” (speculation: my Latin is not good enough :-)). In
>the case of the “majority”, they would stress the similarity between the
>readings of D and the Peshitta, to the point of identity, while Clark would
>attach himself to the difference.
>
>Briefly put, what is the reading of the Peshitta, and how should I
>understand Tischendorf?
>
>(rainy) greetings from the Algarve, Portugal
>Philip Maertens
>
>

------------
Peter Williams
Senior Lecturer in New Testament
Deputy Head of School of Divinity, History and Philosophy
University of Aberdeen
p.j.williams@...

----- Original Message -----

From: Tommy Wasserman

To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 10:04 AM

Subject: [textualcriticism] Talmud and Ps 91

Dear list,

I am trying to locate a passage in the Jerusalem Talmud which says that
it is permitted to recite Ps. 91 (and Ps. 3) as a protection against
approaching evil. This question has to do with the use of Ps 91
(masoretic) for apotropaic purposes. There are many manuscripts with
this text, which have been used as amulets. I would be very grateful
for help with this reference.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University

Andrew,

thank you very much for this reference! It is not the one I was
originally looking for, but it is certainly as good. I find it
interesting that that it was called "Song against (or referring to)
evil spirits/demons" or "Song against plagues," and that it was not
forbidden to recite for apotropaic purpose.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University
Sweden


2006-10-19 kl. 22.46 skrev sarban:

> I don't know of a reference in the Jerusalem Talmud but apparently
> the Babylonian Talmud has
>  
> Babylonian Talmud, Shevuot 15b
> The Shir shel Pega`im (Psalm against Demons, i.e. Psalm 91)—some call
> it Shir shel
> Nega`im (Psalm against Plagues). Why “plagues?” Because it is written,
> “No plague
> shall approach your dwelling place” (v. 10). Why “demons?” Because it
> is written, “A
> thousand may fall at your left side” (v. 7). [...] R. Joshua ben Levi
> said, “It is
> efficacious to recite this upon going to sleep.” But how could he do
> that?! Didn’t R.
> Joshua himself say, “It is forbidden to heal oneself with words of
> Torah?” —It is
> different with regard to protecting oneself [against future harm].
>  
> see
> http://www.narayever.com/adulted/readings/magic/
> Selected%20Talmudic%20Texts%20on%20Magic.pdf 
>  
> Andrew Criddle
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From:  Tommy Wasserman
>> To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 10:04 AM
>> Subject: [textualcriticism] Talmud and Ps 91
>>
>>
>> Dear list,
>>
>> I am trying to locate a passage in the Jerusalem Talmud which says
>> that
>> it is permitted to recite Ps. 91 (and Ps. 3) as a protection against
>> approaching evil. This question has to do with the use of Ps 91
>> (masoretic) for apotropaic purposes. There are many manuscripts with
>> this text, which have been used as amulets. I would be very grateful
>> for help with this reference.
>>
>> Tommy Wasserman
>> Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
>> Lund University
>>
>
>

I have with his permission added Dr. Maurice Robinson's comments on the
Rev. 5:9 variant where the NA27 follows Codex A and the Ethiopic against
all other witnesses.  It is in an endnote in this Word document:
http://www.bibletranslation.ws/trans/revwgrk.zip

David Robert Palmer referenced the following footnote:
>> Dr. Maurice Robinson offered his take on these variants in an
email I received from him on Tue, 29 Aug 2006:

"While certainly the NA/UBS reading is problematic from my
perspective due to its limited (singular) support, so also the TR
reading is problematic due to its slim support and what appears to
be an obvious attempt to smooth out the presumed difficulty.  The
problem, however, from my "reasoned transmissional" perspective, is
why the great mass of Byzantine MSS (both Andreas and Q groups
united here) would join and maintain throughout transmissional
history a reading which, if not original, otherwise should have
been "corrected" on the large scale in order to eliminate the
apparent difficulty of interpretation.  Since such did not occur on
the grand scale, then within the Byzantine-priority perspective it
would appear that there must have been some reason why the scribes
did not balk en masse.

So, just for the record, here is my take regarding one possible
explanation (not necessarily the only one that could be provided):

Context: (5:8) the four living creatures and the 24 elders fall upon
their faces and (5:9) "they sing" a new song.

Does "they" include both parties (i.e. the living creatures *and*
the elders together?  Or might the "they" only involve those
comprising one or the other group at any given point?

My suspicion is that the referent of "they" fluctuates according to
the nature of the portion of the song cited; what one then finds is
something in the manner of an antiphonic chorus, with each group
taking its own proper part.  Thus:

(5:9) And they [the 24 elders] sang a new song, saying, "You are
worthy to take the book and to open its seals, because you were
slain, and you redeemed _us_ to God by your blood, out of every
tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation."

(5:10) [Antiphonic response by the four living creatures, perhaps
joined by  the great multitude of angels surrounding the throne
mentioned in 5:10]:  "And you made _them_ kings and priests to our
God, and _they_ shall reign upon the earth."

(5:11) [now discussing the entire mixed multitude]:  And I saw and I
heard, as a voice/sound of many angels surrounding the throne, also
the living creatures, also the elders....[these all then continue
(5:12-14) with the song/statement in unison, following which two
separate reactions occur: *only* the four living creatures
say "Amen", while the 24 elders fall down and worship, thus
reflecting once again a separation of function and statement between
the two groups].

This certainly would seem to work and provide some plausible
explanation for the Byzantine reading.  It would also help explain
why the vast majority of scribes appeared to have little or no
problem in perpetuating that particular sequence of text.

Others may differ in their evaluation or interpretation, but I think
it incumbent upon whatever text anyone favors that its supporters
offer a reasonable explanation not only for their favored reading in
context, but also in order to reasonably explain the rise and
dominance of the Byzantine reading (which too often is not done, and
more so in a complex book such as Revelation).  There seems to be
enough other referent shifts within Revelation or the Johannine
writings (e.g. Rev 16:15; 22:6-7, 11-12; cf. Jn 8:31, 44) so that
the explanation give would find support; however, those other cases
are not essential to the interpretation suggested above.

Maurice A Robinson, PhD"<<

I might add to the above that such shifts of person are quite common
in the poetic passages of Scripture, and no further explanation is
really necessary.

For example, in Psalm 2 David begins by speaking of God, Christ, and
the heathen in the third person; then shifts to the first person
quoting the heathen referring to God; back to the third person; then
to the first person quoting God referring to His King; then the
first person quoting the Christ referring to God; back to the first
person quoting God referring to the Christ; then to the second
person referring to the heathen.

Many of these shifts are subtle and can be determined only by
context. But this Psalm was quoted four times in the NT with no
question as to who was saying what in reference to whom.

Daniel Buck

In response to:

Dear list,

I am trying to locate a passage in the Jerusalem Talmud which says that
it is permitted to recite Ps. 91 (and Ps. 3) as a protection against
approaching evil. This question has to do with the use of Ps 91
(masoretic) for apotropaic purposes. There are many manuscripts with
this text, which have been used as amulets. I would be very grateful
for help with this reference.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University

Though someone else on the list could likely provide more details, I'm guessing
that you are recalling Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 6:2. After a discussion of
sandals, the subject of amulets arises, amulets for healing. Amulets that are
allowed and those that are not are discussed. Then in the end of the section,
two psalms are identified as being for the afflicted, Psalm 3:1-2 and that
whole psalm and Psalm 91:1-9.

best
Stephen Goranson
http://www.duke.edu/~goranson

Dear Stephen,

Yes, that was the passage I had in mind. Thank you very much.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University
Sweden

2006-10-23 kl. 18.18 skrev goranson@...:

> In response to:
>
>  Dear list,
>
>  I am trying to locate a passage in the Jerusalem Talmud which says
> that
>  it is permitted to recite Ps. 91 (and Ps. 3) as a protection against
>  approaching evil. This question has to do with the use of Ps 91
>  (masoretic) for apotropaic purposes. There are many manuscripts with
>  this text, which have been used as amulets. I would be very grateful
>  for help with this reference.
>
>  Tommy Wasserman
>  Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
>  Lund University
>
>  Though someone else on the list could likely provide more details,
> I'm guessing
>  that you are recalling Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 6:2. After a
> discussion of
>  sandals, the subject of amulets arises, amulets for healing. Amulets
> that are
>  allowed and those that are not are discussed. Then in the end of the
> section,
>  two psalms are identified as being for the afflicted, Psalm 3:1-2 and
> that
>  whole psalm and Psalm 91:1-9.
>
>  best
>  Stephen Goranson
> http://www.duke.edu/~goranson
>
>
>

Dear list,

I thought I would announce on this list that there is a software,
QAnalys, that I developed with a friend in 2001. This freeware helps
you perform a quantitative analysis on manuscripts — a statistical
method to examine textual relationships. In May I received a report
from a user that QAnalys did not work on his version of Excel. It was
originally developed in Excel 5.0 for Mac, but the programmer has now
tested it on Excel 2003 (on Windows XP) and it does work well in that
version. The programmer suspected that some functionality disappeared
in subsequent versions of Excel, but was restored in Excel 2003.

Anyway QAnalys is freeware and can be downloaded from here:

http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/downloads/statistics/qanalys/

I would be grateful for any feedback if someone has experience of this
software. What did you use it for? Was it helpful? Any desired features
that could be developed for future versions? ...

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University
Sweden

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Cosaert" <cosaca@...>
wrote:
>
> In light of this situation, and the recent methodological
advancements in text critical analysis, I decided to reevaluate
Clement's text of the gospels. After gathering all his quotations,
adaptations, and allusions, I collated his text against the major
leading textual witnesses.

+++++++++++++++++++++

Mr. Dykes asks:

Thanks for your contribution. I am curious, what materials did you use
to access or evaluate Clement's TEXT? Did you you use collations of
his writings? or did you use films of his surviving MSS or citations?
--What were the major manuscripts you accessed?-- Did you view the MSS
directly or via films or photos?

thank you for responding,
sincerely,
Mr. Gary S. Dykes

Listers may find this quite amazing:

http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?vci=3250796&vcat=462465&vcatn=The+\
Bruce+M.+Metzger+Collection&sortby=1

Jim


--
Jim West, ThD

http://web.infoave.net/~jwest  -- Biblical Studies Resources
http://drjimwest.wordpress.com  -- Weblog

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Jim West <jwest@...> wrote:
>
> Listers may find this quite amazing:
>
>
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?vci=3250796&vcat=462465&vcatn=The+\
Bruce+M.+Metzger+Collection&sortby=1
>
> Jim
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks Jim!

I assume that Metzger is still alive, and that this is a small portion
of his library. Interesting way to sell. But ABE sure gets a healthy
cut (13.5%). I also wonder if he has donated any texts to needy
institutions or individuals??

I have just posted a complete scanned copy of F.J.A. Hort's "The WAY,
the TRUTH, the LIFE" on my site. It is a great read! Hort reflects
upon using our God-given reasoning abilities in critically reading the
precious text. Hort loves God's Word! An impressive book, free to
download! - www.biblical-data.org  -- Navigate to "THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS".

Also added is the LOC Mt. Sinai - St. Catherine's CHECKLIST, needed to
order films from the LOC. It is in a PDF file,  --  navigate to
"Addresses for Acquiring Films of Biblical Manuscripts", from the same
site

www.biblical-data.org

sincerely,
Mr. Gary S. Dykes

Dear brother Filotheu,
There is indeed a manuscript... in Arabic! In Mark 1.6, a corrector of Sinai
Arabic 106 has replaced the "normal" text (locusts and wild honey) by
"blades from the trees and herbs" (at.râf min a$-$ajar wa-'ah.$î$ - $ being
the letter shin). The manuscript dates from 1056 and is one of the oldest of
the "Melkite Arabic version of the XIth century". As to the corrector, I
can't propose a date for him, but indeed he is probably motivated by ascetic
theology... or corrects according to a Greek or Syriac manuscript that has
the same text. I've always wondered!
For more on this Arabic version, see my inventary of Arabic Gospel
manuscript in Le Muséon of 2003, p.415-477. The melkite version of the XIth
century, of which I'm prepairing an edition according to its oldest
manuscript, is introduced on p. 446-458. It probably has an old syriac
Vorlage.
Let's go on with this problem of melagria, quite interesting for me too!
(and greetings to you Gie!)
Jean Valentin

--
Jean Valentin - Bruxelles - Belgique
jgvalentin@...

"Et bien que je ne prétende pas comprendre,
Je continuerai à étudier jusqu'à la fin"

(Sutra du retour à la nature originelle -
texte chrétien chinois - VIIIe siècle)


> De : "Gie Vleugels" <gvleugels@...>
> Répondre à : textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> Date : Thu, 26 Oct 2006 08:27:11 +0200
> À : textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> Objet : Re: [textualcriticism] Melagria
>
> Dear m.f.,
> Is the name melagri*on* for the plant used at all? If that is the case, the
> emendation is quite appealing.
> Yours,
> GV
>
>
> On 10/25/06, Filotheu Monahul <filotheu@...> wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Is anyone knowing a papyrus / parchment containing the text of Mt 3:4 & Mk
>> 1:6 "MELAGRIA/MELAGRION" instead of "MELI AGRION" ? Someone gave me the idea
>> that St. John was feeding himself with the herbs used centuries after him by
>> the holy monks of the desert.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> m.f.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Gie Vleugels
>
>> <(((°>  +  <°)))><
>

Listers may find this to be of interest:

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/War_of_words_erupts_over_sale_of_ancie\
nt_texts.html?siteSect=105&sid=7202046&cKey=1162022995000

Mind the wrap.

Jim


--
Jim West, ThD

http://web.infoave.net/~jwest  -- Biblical Studies Resources
http://drjimwest.wordpress.com  -- Weblog

It would be a good thing if a university like Yale could afford to
buy them. They've not exactly been accessible to researchers in the
Bodmer Private Collection.

Peter

At 20:14 29/10/2006, you wrote:
>Listers may find this to be of interest:
>
>http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/War_of_words_erupts_over_sale_of_anci\
ent_texts.html?siteSect=105&sid=7202046&cKey=1162022995000
>
>Mind the wrap.
>
>Jim
>
>
>--
>Jim West, ThD
>
>http://web.infoave.net/~jwest  -- Biblical Studies Resources
>http://drjimwest.wordpress.com  -- Weblog
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Peter M. Head, PhD
Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
Tyndale House
36 Selwyn Gardens
Cambridge CB3 9BA
01223 566601

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Jim West <jwest@...> wrote:
>
> Listers may find this to be of interest:
>
>
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/War_of_words_erupts_over_sale_
of_ancient_texts.html?siteSect=105&sid=7202046&cKey=1162022995000


Are they talking about P75???

Nevertheless, the foundation did send me there only negative photos (!)
of P72. I will publish these with transcriptions in my forthcoming
dissertation on Jude. And facsimiles of the complete Bibliotheca
Bodmeriana series has been published by K.G. Saur, which is very good
in the light of this news that the collection is breaking up.

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University
Sweden

2006-10-30 kl. 11.48 skrev Peter M. Head:

> It would be a good thing if a university like Yale could afford to
>  buy them. They've not exactly been accessible to researchers in the
>  Bodmer Private Collection.
>
>  Peter
>
>  At 20:14 29/10/2006, you wrote:
>  >Listers may find this to be of interest:
>  >
>
> >http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/
> War_of_words_erupts_over_sale_of_ancient_texts.html?
> siteSect=105&sid=7202046&cKey=1162022995000
>  >
>  >Mind the wrap.
>  >
>  >Jim
>  >
>  >
>  >--
>  >Jim West, ThD
>  >
>  >http://web.infoave.net/~jwest -- Biblical Studies Resources
>  >http://drjimwest.wordpress.com -- Weblog
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >Yahoo! Groups Links
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
>  Peter M. Head, PhD
>  Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
>  Tyndale House
>  36 Selwyn Gardens
>  Cambridge CB3 9BA
>  01223 566601
>
>
>

Absolutely P75, and probably also P66 since they say "two codices ..."
Strangely they did not bother about P72.

Tommy Wasserman

Wieland Willker wrote:

> --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Jim West <jwest@...> wrote:
>  >
>  > Listers may find this to be of interest:
>  >
>  >
> http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/
> War_of_words_erupts_over_sale_
>  of_ancient_texts.html?siteSect=105&sid=7202046&cKey=1162022995000
>
>  Are they talking about P75???
>
>
>

On a second thought, it may only be P75 after all (= P.Bodmer XIV and
XV).

Tommy Wasserman
Centre for Theology and Religious Studies
Lund University
Sweden

2006-10-30 kl. 13.05 skrev Tommy Wasserman:

> Absolutely P75, and probably also P66 since they say "two codices ..."
> Strangely they did not bother about P72.
>
> Tommy Wasserman
>
> Wieland Willker wrote:
>
>> --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Jim West <jwest@...> wrote:
>>  >
>>  > Listers may find this to be of interest:
>>  >
>>  >
>> http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/detail/
>> War_of_words_erupts_over_sale_
>>  of_ancient_texts.html?siteSect=105&sid=7202046&cKey=1162022995000
>>
>>  Are they talking about P75???
>>
>>
>>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim West" <jwest@...>
To: <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>; <crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 2:59 PM
Subject: [XTalk] Bruce Metzger is selling his library


> Listers may find this quite amazing:
>
>
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?vci=3250796&vcat=462465&vcatn=The+\
Bruce+M.+Metzger+Collection&sortby=1
>
> Jim
>
>
> --
> Jim West, ThD


My purchase of Prof. Metzger's Friedrich Schulthess' Grammatik des
Christlich-Palastinischen Aramaisch 1924 edition Tubingen came today and I
am like a kid in a candy shop.  It is signed on the front flyleaf by Bruce
Metzger in 1948 and some of his notes in the bibliography.  It is hard to
believe he is 92.  This will be invaluable to me, Jim.  I am glad you gave
the heads up because I am sure these books will go fast.

Jack

Jack Kilmon
San Antonio, Texas

It appears that there is disagreement between Hoskier and the UBS4
apparatus, where the UBS4 apparatus indicates that minuscule 2351 reads
GUNAIKA SOU in Revelation 2:20, and Hoskier does not list it as one
reading GUNAIKA SOU, but rather lacking SOU.  Hoskier does not
explicitly state that 2351 lacks SOU, he only fails to include 2351 in
the list of MSS that include SOU.  The Stephens 3rd edition lacks SOU,
so he only lists those MSS that differ from that edition.  There are
only two variants here; those with SOU and those without.

Does anyone have access to minuscule 2351, or know for certain what its
reading is here?

Thanks.

David Robert Palmer