In Matthew 25:1, were the 10 virgins waiting for the bridegroom, or for the
bridegroom and the bride?  "The bridegroom and the bride" is supported by D X*
OL Vulgate f-1 Armenian/Old-Georgian and the Peshitta.

It is easy to see why the reference to the bride would be omitted:  first, we
see no mention of the bride throughout the parable.  Second, an allegorical
approach to the parable precluded the idea of the bride arriving with the
bridegroom.  Since the virgins may be interpreted as doing what Jesus is
instructing his followers to do, there is not much room in the parable for a
bride.

But we should not assume that Jesus intended such an allegorical approach to the
parable.  And there may be a perfectly good reason why we don't see any mention
of the bride:  she was on time, unlike the tardy bridegroom.  If we picture the
10 virgins meeting with the bride, and then waiting for the groom to arrive so
that the procession can begin, the non-mention of the bride is accounted for.

Otherwise we have to assume that Jesus assumed that His listeners would assume
that when the groom showed up around midnight, the bride was waiting, not with
the bridesmaids, but at the location of the marriage-feast.

And then there's Matthew 25:6 -- what is the first part of the midnight cry? 
Neither UBS-4 nor NA-27 includes this variant-unit.  In Byz W Vg Pesh, the cry
is not simply, "Look, the bridegroom!" -- it's "Look, the bridegroom is coming!"
And it would not be terribly difficult for that ERCETAI to be accidentally
skipped, situated next to EXERCESQE.

Both these variant-units deserve careful thought.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

"A Disconcerting Prayer: On the Originality of Luke 23:34a"
JBL 129, no. 3 (2010): 521-536
Nathan Eubank
[nathaneubank@...]

From the intro:
" In this essay I shall review the external evidence, arguing that
proponents of the shorter reading have exaggerated their case. Then, after
examining the formidable intrinsic evidence in favor of the longer reading,
I shall turn to neglected transcriptional evidence that shows that Luke
23:34a was a problem passage in early Christianity."


The article is available from the author on request.


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

Thank you very much for Marcion's Gospel (Luke).

Is there any hope to get to his Pauline letters?

Oun.

--- On Wed, 8/25/10, Heterodoxus <heterodoxus@...> wrote:

From: Heterodoxus <heterodoxus@...>
Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] On line (English) text of Marcion's (Lk and
Pauline letters)
To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, August 25, 2010, 8:04 AM







 









       Oun Kwon,

I've located the The Gospel of Marcion in six (6) sections:


         SECTION I     (Luke 3:1-7:50)

           SECTION II    (Luke 8:1-10:24)

           SECTION III   (Luke 10:25-13:17)

           SECTION IV   (Luke 13:18-17:37)

           SECTION V    (Luke 18:1-21:38)

           SECTION VI   (Luke 22:1-24:47)
       I hope you find these links working and helpful,

Pat

Archaeologists discover unknown artifacts.
Diplomatists discuss known events.
Philosophists debate existence, knowledge, and ethics.
Theologists disseminate the unknowable as religious truth.
From: Oun Kwon <kwonbooks@...>
To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, August 24, 2010 6:20:06 PM
Subject: [textualcriticism] On line (English) text of Marcion's (Lk and Pauline
letters)









 






       Is there any online access to Marcion's canon (Luke and Pauline letters)
so that I can read?



A few hits on google search show broken links ;-<



I appreciate very much.



Oun Kwon

-- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "james_snapp_jr" wrote:

>> In Matthew 25:1, were the 10 virgins waiting for the bridegroom, or for the
bridegroom and the bride?  "The bridegroom and the bride" is supported by D X*
OL Vulgate f-1 Armenian/Old-Georgian and the Peshitta.


  And then there's Matthew 25:6 -- what is the first part of the midnight cry? 
Neither UBS-4 nor NA-27 includes this variant-unit.  In Byz W Vg Pesh, the cry
is not simply, "Look, the bridegroom!" -- it's "Look, the bridegroom is coming!"
And it would not be terribly difficult for that ERCETAI to be accidentally
skipped, situated next to EXERCESQE.<<

Given the paucity of evidence, we can only surmise that there is a fair amount
of textual fluidity here. ERCETAI would be more likely to be dropped in front of
ERCESQUE--a nonexistent word. And, as it turns out, several mss have, instead,
EGEIRESQE; a very meaningful alternate in that context.

Recently I've been transcribing Latin mss and am struck by how hard it often is
to read something written in my own native alphabet. Is that a t, an r, or a v?
Maybe even an i? Did I not have a printed text before me, I'd have to wildly
guess at the identity of the word. I don't doubt that scribes often faced the
same problem, with two responses--and we know that many scribes were not any
more fluent in Greek than I am in Latin. One, to transcribe the word as nearly
as they could, mauger sensibility (the barbaric approach). The other, to guess a
synonym, or anything that fitted the context (such as EGEIRESQE here), as the
most likely candidate (the scholarly approach).

Daniel Buck

In the 1916 and 1917 issues of Bibliotheca Sacra, E.S. Buchanan has a couple of
articles that describe readings in Codex Huntingtonianus, a Latin MS in the
museum of the Hispanic Society in New York City.  In the 1916 article "More
Light from the Western Text," Buchanan states, "The MS. is not older in its
copying than the thirteenth century; but its text goes back to the same ancient
source from which the Codex Bezae and the Fleury Palimpsest (both fifth-century
documents) are derived."

I'm not sure whatever happened to Codex Huntingtonianus, which -- I think (I
just started looking into this particular codex) -- also came to be called the
Tarragona Palimpsest, since it was in Tarragona, Spain, before finding its way
to NYC.  After reading Buchanan's introduction to "The Oldest Text of the
Gospels," it sort of looks like somehow Buchanan had a greatly exaggerated idea
of its importance, and claimed that its text challenged the usual text of the
Gospels and Acts.  Its owner, Archer Milton Huntington, therefore became
concerned that publication of the text of the MS might be harmful to religion,
and basically locked up the MS!  Are the extracts in these two issues of
Bibliotheca Sacra all that is available, or did Gryson, Fischer & Co. obtain the
full text?

(In NTTS VIII, Metzger mentions this Latin MS in a footnote on p. 68 (in "70 or
72 Disciples?"), and almost mockingly mentions Buchanan's claim to have been
able to read it at the top of a skyscraper; Metzger also states that Buchanan's
edition of its text was "suppressed.")

Anyway, in this Latin MS, Buchanan states that in John 10:30, it says, "Ego et
pater et spiritus sanctus unum sumus" -- "I and the Father and the Holy Spirit
are one."  Now, other extracts show that the Gospels-text is saturated with
interpolated references to the Holy Spirit.  So this could be just one of oodles
of curious but insignificant singular readings.

On the other hand, what if "I and the Father and the Holy Spirit are one" in
John 10:30 is genuinely an ancient Old Latin variant?  Theoretically, this could
have something to do with the creation of the CJ:  maybe Cyprian's comment that
is sometimes interpreted as a reference to the CJ was, instead, elicited by
Cyprian's recollection of an expanded form of John 10:30.

On the /other/ other hand, maybe the expanded form of John 10:30 in the
Huntington Latin MS is based on the scribe's recollection of the expanded form
of I Jn. 5:7.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "james_snapp_jr" wrote:
>> On the other hand, what if "I and the Father and the Holy Spirit are one" in
John 10:30 is genuinely an ancient Old Latin variant?  Theoretically, this could
have something to do with the creation of the CJ:  maybe Cyprian's comment that
is sometimes interpreted as a reference to the CJ was, instead, elicited by
Cyprian's recollection of an expanded form of John 10:30.<<

Not likely. Cyprian quoted the CJ as "these three are one" which is an OL
reading (hi tres unum sunt) of the canonical 5:8.

>> On the /other/ other hand, maybe the expanded form of John 10:30 in the
Huntington Latin MS is based on the scribe's recollection of the expanded form
of I Jn. 5:7. <<

I think not. The Scribe was obviously trinitarian, and needed not further
encouragement once he started interpolating 'and the Holy Spirit" everywhere he
could.

Daniel Buck

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

From: james_snapp_jr

To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 4:35 PM

Subject: [textualcriticism] The Comma Johanneum and a Latin MS in New York

 

In the 1916 and 1917 issues of Bibliotheca Sacra, E.S. Buchanan has a couple of articles that describe readings in Codex Huntingtonianus, a Latin MS in the museum of the Hispanic Society in New York City. In the 1916 article "More Light from the Western Text," Buchanan states, "The MS. is not older in its copying than the thirteenth century; but its text goes back to the same ancient source from which the Codex Bezae and the Fleury Palimpsest (both fifth-century documents) are derived."

I'm not sure whatever happened to Codex Huntingtonianus, which -- I think (I just started looking into this particular codex) -- also came to be called the Tarragona Palimpsest, since it was in Tarragona, Spain, before finding its way to NYC. After reading Buchanan's introduction to "The Oldest Text of the Gospels," it sort of looks like somehow Buchanan had a greatly exaggerated idea of its importance, and claimed that its text challenged the usual text of the Gospels and Acts. Its owner, Archer Milton Huntington, therefore became concerned that publication of the text of the MS might be harmful to religion, and basically locked up the MS! Are the extracts in these two issues of Bibliotheca Sacra all that is available, or did Gryson, Fischer & Co. obtain the full text?

Hi James

Read Metzger "Early Versions of the New Testament" pages 311-312 for the bizarre story.

Basically, the underwriting in this manuscript (a Latin Missal) which Buchanan edited and which he regarded as a distinctive text of the Gospels and Acts is widely regarded as non-existent. 

Andrew Criddle   

Andrew Criddle,

Thanks.  That's a bizarre story alright.  If Buchanan's transcriptions of Luke,
John, and Acts, saturated with random variations, all came purely from his
imagination, that would be psychologically fascinating.

I'm not quite as quick as Metzger, though, to dismiss Buchanan's claims
altogether.  Looking through the materials about it that I've managed to access
so far, it looks like Lake, Lowe (= Loew), and Sanders affirmed that they didn't
see any underwriting, but Buchanan similarly affirms that he himself didn't see
any underwriting at first, until he saw the pages in special lighting -- from
the attic of the Hispanic Society Building in NYC (which must be the skyscraper
to which Metzger referred).  In one of the articles in "The Oldest Text of the
Gospels," there's a claim that J. Rendel Harris confirmed that the codex is a
palimpsest.

I've heard of lettering so faint that it could only be seen at a certain time of
day.  It doesn't seem entirely inconceivable that the Huntington Codex might
have underwriting that is easier to see at higher altitudes than at low
altitudes (although I don't know why such a thing would ever be the case).  Even
if there is just a 1 in 1,000 chance that the elaborate text presented by
Buchanan was not the product of his imagination, it might be a good idea to take
a look at the Huntington Codex under ultraviolet light or x-rays, or at the
location where Buchanan claimed to see letters.

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

At long last my OCS (or Old Slavonic) resources are ready.
This is the URL:

www.biblical-data.org/OCS/Slavic New testament.htm

or also go to my "Ancient Versions" Page and navigate to the pages.

Focus is upon Slavic palaeography. Lots of good maps, tools, fonts,
and an essay upon the value of the OCS version for NT textual criticism.

Enjoy!
Gary S. Dykes
www.Biblical-data.org

Sounds like an interesting project. I tried to look at it but the link seems to
be invalid; at least from my location (USA) it doesn't work. Would appreciate it
if you could supply a corrected link, or let us know when the site is actually
live.

James


Try this:
http://www.biblical-data.org/OCS/Slavic%20New%20testament.htm
[--- Wieland]


--- On Sat, 9/18/10, mydogregae01 <garyandgale@...> wrote:

> From: mydogregae01 <garyandgale@...>
> Subject: [textualcriticism] Slavic Resource Pages Ready!
> To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, September 18, 2010, 10:40 AM
> At long last my OCS (or Old Slavonic)
> resources are ready.
> This is the URL:
>
> www.biblical-data.org/OCS/Slavic New testament.htm
>
> or also go to my "Ancient Versions" Page and navigate to
> the pages.
>
> Focus is upon Slavic palaeography. Lots of good maps,
> tools, fonts,
> and an essay upon the value of the OCS version for NT
> textual criticism.
>
> Enjoy!
> Gary S. Dykes
> www.Biblical-data.org
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> � � textualcriticism-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>

 

Sounds like an interesting project. I tried to look at it but the link seems to be invalid; at least from my location (USA) it doesn't work. Would appreciate it if you could supply a corrected link, or let us know when the site is actually live.

James

Try this:
http://www.biblical-data.org/OCS/Slavic%20New%20testament.htm
[--- Wieland]

--- On Sat, 9/18/10, mydogregae01 <garyandgale@...> wrote:

> From: mydogregae01 <garyandgale@...>
> Subject: [textualcriticism] Slavic Resource Pages Ready!
> To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, September 18, 2010, 10:40 AM
> At long last my OCS (or Old Slavonic)
> resources are ready.
> This is the URL:
>
> www.biblical-data.org/OCS/Slavic New testament.htm
>
> or also go to my "Ancient Versions" Page and navigate to
> the pages.
>
> Focus is upon Slavic palaeography. Lots of good maps,
> tools, fonts,
> and an essay upon the value of the OCS version for NT
> textual criticism.
>
> Enjoy!
> Gary S. Dykes
> www.Biblical-data.org
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     textualcriticism-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>

Hi Everyone,

Who is the right person to tell about errors in the UBS4 apparatus? Richard
Mallett just found inconsistencies in the variation unit for Mark 3.7-8 relating
to it-c and it-f.

Best,

Tim Finney

From:
http://www.uni-muenster.de/NTTextforschung/
____________________________
Projekte:
Wissenschaftliche Handausgaben des griechischen Neuen Testaments
Im INTF werden die weltweit benutzten wissenschaftlichen Handausgaben des
griechischen Neuen Testaments (Nestle-Aland und GNT), Synopsen, mehrsprachige
Ausgaben, Sonderausgaben bzw. Revision dieser Ausgaben betreut und auf dem
neuesten Forschungsstand ediert. Ziel der Handausgaben ist es, einen Text des
Neuen Testaments zu bieten, der dem gegenw�rtigen Stand der Forschung
entspricht, sowie einen f�r die Gesamt�berlieferung repr�sentativen kritischen
Apparat.
____________________________

Teunis van Lopik


--- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "yennifmit" <tfinney@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Who is the right person to tell about errors in the UBS4 apparatus? Richard
Mallett just found inconsistencies in the variation unit for Mark 3.7-8 relating
to it-c and it-f.
>
> Best,
>
> Tim Finney
>

The BL has launched a manuscripts website.
Unfortunately I cannot download the images.
:-(

Tommy Wasserman kindly made a list on the ETC blog:

http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2010/09/british-library-digi
tised-manuscript.html

If someone knows if there is a way to download these, let us know!

Best wishes
     Wieland
     <><
--------------------------
Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie
Textcritical commentary:
http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/

On 09/27/2010 06:51 AM, Scott Freedlun wrote:
> Unfortunately these images are divided up into 20-30 smaller images.
> It is similar to Zoomify viewed images. Unless you have a very
> advanced stitching program, grabbing those images from your internet
> cache will not help.
>
ImageMagick is your friend...
http://www.imagemagick.org/script/index.php ...


bob
> The easiest way ti save an image is to take a screen shot. The higher
> res your monitor is the better. Hitting f11 to maximize your browser
> will help a bit.
>
> If you then resample the image up to 300 dpi you have a decent image.
>
> All the same it is awesome that these are online at all.
>
> Scott
>
>

Imagemagick is a wondrous piece of software, true, and it's the first thought
that occurred to me. But for the less technically-inclined--who are using
Firefox browser--the screengrab add-on might be quite helpful:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1146/

James

--- On Mon, 9/27/10, Robert Relyea <bob@...> wrote:

> From: Robert Relyea <bob@...>
> Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] BL images online
> To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
> Cc: "Scott Freedlun" <scottfreedlun@...>
> Date: Monday, September 27, 2010, 1:04 PM
> On 09/27/2010 06:51 AM, Scott
> Freedlun wrote:
> > Unfortunately these images are divided up into 20-30
> smaller images.
> > It is similar to Zoomify viewed images. Unless you
> have a very
> > advanced stitching program, grabbing those images from
> your internet
> > cache will not help.
> >���
> ImageMagick is your friend...
> http://www.imagemagick.org/script/index.php ...
>
>
> bob
> > The easiest way ti save an image is to take a screen
> shot. The higher
> > res your monitor is the better. Hitting f11 to
> maximize your browser
> > will help a bit.
> >
> > If you then resample the image up to 300 dpi you have
> a decent image.
> >
> > All the same it is awesome that these are online at
> all.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >���
>
>
>

Scott Freedlun wrote:
>
> Seems like nice little addon, but it seems you need to right-click to
> get to the context window, but right-click looks to be dis--abled in
> the viewer.
>
> Any thoughts?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Mr. Freelun and others,

Two thoughts.

(1) I use "Snag It" (it uses special hot key combinations, as the right click
feature is often disabled). I use it on all editions of Windows. Still the
capture needs to be rezzed to be sharp. So some (in fact a lot, if 200 images
are needed!) effort is required and the whole situation is very time consuming.
This is by design.

(2) The folks in Britain, their Bible departments and their librarians have a
very elitist attitude. Their intent is to make money. You want good images of
codex 01, BUY their publication(s). It is obvious to all users worldwide, that
these folks do not want to share openly and freely as do other scholars in other
nations. They can easily make it easy to copy and print the images, so that
scholars can collate off-line and do offline research. They have consistently
refused to. Their behaviours are despicable.

The British library especially has a LONG history of making life hard for
earnest scholars. Why they even hesitate to share manuscripts they stole!! Or
bought under questionable circumstances. Some of their acquisitions were
outright robberies, (White monastery materials for example). Who wants to
collate off of a computer screen?? Shame on them!! They will not change, I for
one vote to ostracize the BL and Museum and perhaps the Universities of Oxford,
London and Cambridge. Censor them. They do not really contribute. They use the
labors of others, but do not freely share. Such is my opinion and experience
with the BL. The films they sell (at premium prices) are quite poor.

Does anyone else want to share their horror stories from the BL?? Or of other
holding institutions? Several others are difficult, Sackler, Harvard, Yale, the
Vatican and Berkeley are testy. Others??

Mr. Gary S. Dykes
www.Biblical-data.org

The Heothina -- a cycle of eleven lections for matins, each lection being about
the rising of Christ -- are, according to an article in the Blackwell Dictionary
of Eastern Christianity (of which I can access a snippet online), mentioned by
Severus of Antioch (no relation to Hogwarts Professor Severus Snape) as
something which had been "recently introduced" in his time/place.

They are:

(1) Matthew 28:16-20,
(2) Mark 16:1-8,
(3) Mark 16:9-20,
(4) Luke 24:1-12,
(5) Luke 24:12-35,
(6) Luke 24:36-53,
(7) John 20:1-10,
(8) John 20:11-18,
(9) John 20:19-31,
(10) John 21:1-14, and
(11) John 21:15-25.

Cyril of Jerusalem, in Catechetical Lecture XIV, part 24 (on p. 100-101 of NPNF
Vol. VII), states that his listeners had heard a passage that mentioned Christ's
ascension on the previous day, which had been a Sunday; this might indicate that
the Heothina were in use when/where Cyril was teaching.

Now, after visiting the Cyprian Project website and downloading all available
volumes of Patrologia Orientalis, I am left with the task of pinpointing exactly
where Severus of Antioch mentions the Heothina.  But that's a chore.  So, before
undertaking that task, I am wondering:  would anyone happen to have the
information readily available?

A bright shiny ruble awaits the first person who can provide precisely the
correct reference!

Yours in Christ,

James Snapp, Jr.

--- In post #1889, Steven Avery wrote:

>> Hi Folks,

> J. N. Darby ...said in his NT introduction: As to John 8 ... in my examination
of the text I found that in one of the best MSS. of the old Latin, two pages had
been torn out because it was there, carrying away part of the text preceding and
following. <

There aren't that many Old Latin manuscripts.  Do we know to what manuscript
Darby is referring to here, and how it is carried in the apparatuses?<<

There are 34 OL mss of John. Exactly half of them contain the Pericope Adultera.
It is purposely omitted from four: a, f, q, and delta. But as we know, delta
left the page blank to fill it in later if needed.
It's added to the margin(?) of l.

The ms Darby noted was probably b, Codex Veronensis. It's lacunate from 7:44 to
8:12, commencing with "rursus autem congregatis illis loquebatur."

Buchanan, page viii-ix, notes: "The two centre leaves of Q[uire] xiii which
contained the pericope de adultera have vanished and left no trace behind. The
passage has not been erased. The text of b must have been closely akin to that
of ff; for the two lost leaves in b would be exactly filled by the text of ff."

Daniel Buck

Hi all,

I need some assitance. In James Royse's book "Scribal Habits in Early Greek NT
Papyri" he lists PNEUMA (not TO PNEUMA) as a singular reading in Lk 3:22 of P75.
However, Reuben Swanson's NT Gk MSS edition of Luke shows that the article is
also missing in 1346*. Royse notes that he has utilized Swanson's edition (p.
65). Has Royse missed 1346* here? Should the variant not be regarded singular?
At best it maybe sub-singular? Or has Swanson erred in his reference to 1346*?

Thanks for your assistance,
Joe

Tommy Wasserman reports on the ETC blog that Royse's book is
now available as paperback!
This is really great news, since I consider this the most
important TC book recently published. Every TC and Greek
scholar should own a copy, and can now:

James Ronald Royse
"Scribal Habits in Early Greek New Testament Papyri"
Paperback
1086 pages
ISBN: 1589835220

Amazon: $89.95 / EUR 72,99

Go and buy!
If enough people buy it, Brill may consider bringing other
books out as paperback.


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

Interesting blog post:
"Timothy I and the Dead Sea Scrolls found in the 9th century
AD"
by Roger Pearse

read it here:
http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/?p=5135


Btw. Pearse's book on Eusebius' Gospel problems is in the
final stages.

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