Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [lxx] Re: Installment 1 (was definition contest [was Septuagint Versions])

Expand Messages
  • James Miller (office)
    ... Yes, we ll definitely have to get together for pizza some time. I suppose you re located in Dogbone North Dakota or someplace like that? How about dual
    Message 1 of 93 , Jul 31, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Larry J. Swain wrote:
      >
      > RE: Linux--I'm a fan of Linux! I rather miss it, used to be a
      > computer guru before I found it too dehumanizing and decided a second
      > humanities PhD needed to be earned in order to cleanse the palate.
      > I'm all for open source...I've just never put it on my PC because all
      > my wife's work and stuff is PC and she doesn't want to switch. Not
      > worth fighting about with the wife.
      >
      Yes, we'll definitely have to get together for pizza some time. I suppose
      you're located in Dogbone North Dakota or someplace like that? How about
      dual booting that machine? Or, you could just get yourself the latest
      Knoppix CD - it's one of the coolest Linux things goin'. Boots to a full
      graphical Linux that runs in RAM from a CD - no installation. Best Linux
      hardware auto-detection I've seen. If I can't make it to Dogbone for
      pizza, I can at least send you a copy of that CD, can't I?

      > in the 80s, not untypical I think. So the status of the documents we
      > call the NT in my view would be that we have various oral and written
      > traditions about Jesus consisting largely of teaching and sayings, and
      > some stories of his deeds. Mark and Matthew are written, Luke is
      > roughly contemporary with 2 Tim, and John isn't written yet. Paul's
      > authentic letters are in my view already being collected, probably at
      > Ephesus, and becoming authoritative to a wider audience beyond his
      > churches. I would also say that John's letters are written (out on a
      > limb there) and I and II Peter as well, probably James and Jude and
      > Hebrews. But I don't think anyone has even thought about collecting
      > them together yet, nor that they have reached wide audiences
      > throughout the church yet.
      >
      > I would say then that the words of Jesus are becoming "holy writing"
      > if you will, even if not in written form, and on a par with Torah or
      > Isaiah, but not yet fully there. While the other documents have more
      > or less authority in various communities, I no of no evidence to
      > suggest that they have moved much past the stage of composition and
      > reception within their own small set of communities.
      >
      So, it sounds like maybe we could agree that this was a period of flux
      with regard to the category HIERAI GRAMMATA - correct? There were
      certainly definite ideas afoot about what belonged in that category, but
      also a certain open endedness. Would that be an accurate
      characterization of attitudes in, for example, Christian circles at the
      time?

      > By the way, in case you're interested, I too have been studying this
      > world for 15 years formally, and all of those 15 years one of my main
      > interests has been ideas/concepts relating to text, book, canon and
      > scripture in the ancient world, not just in Judaism or Christianity.
      > Some of my ideas have perhaps become too crystalized, but we'll see
      > how much I can unfold here.
      >
      Yes, this is interesting to me. As for myself, I got my PhD in the school
      of hard knocks - magna cum laude - before deciding to go for a second,
      less prestigious degree in the humanities :) . I'm doing postdoctoral
      work in the former field while trying to wrap up the remainder of the
      theology program :) . We'll see which degree is actually more useful to
      me once I get back out into the "real" world (I presume that, at the
      least, I'll never have to work as a dishwasher, exterminator or
      delivery man again, anyways. Not that I have anything against those
      professions [except maybe the exterminator one - harsh chemicals] - I'd
      just be considered overqualified). Text, book, canon and scripture - also
      areas of keen interest for me. My dissertation focuses on a certain
      aspect of those interests.

      James
    • Steve Puluka
      on 8/14/03 2:45 AM, Philip Engmann at phil-eng@ighmail.com wrote: I have Brenton¹s LXX and Kholenberger¹s LXX, (MT and English), so I can confirm the codices
      Message 93 of 93 , Aug 15, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        on 8/14/03 2:45 AM, Philip Engmann at phil-eng@... wrote:

        I have Brenton¹s LXX and Kholenberger¹s LXX, (MT and English), so I can
        confirm the codices which they follow. However, I do not have Rahlf¹s LXX so
        I cannot confirm that Rahlf¹s LXX follow the Codex Alexandrinus and
        Sinacticus.

        Another post from the LXX groups suggests that Rahlf¹s LXX ³is a diplomatic
        text, relying on Vaticancus in the main and supplying Alexandrinus or
        Sinaiticus, and occasionally other texts in lacunae (and apparatus)².

        Dear Philip,

        A few definitions are in order to start.

        Autograph-the original version of the text as written by the biblical author
        or editor. None of these exist physically now. Determining this text is
        the goal of Text Criticism.

        Text type-a collection of existing manuscripts that demonstrate agreement
        among themselves for the most part. Nothing is identical with anything, but
        there are groups of major agreement.

        Critical Text-The editor(s) select the best reading from those manuscripts
        used to produce the volume and place this in the main text of the work. The
        main text then represents what the editor(s) feel is the autograph. In most
        cases, they will not emend a reading (take a reading that has no manuscript
        support but may have been the autograph and explains the existing readings)
        but some editors will.

        Diplomatic Text-A transcription of a certain existing manuscript with the
        variants from a selection of other manuscripts noted.

        Handbook-a text that contain variants from representatives of all the major
        know text types, but acknowledges that the apparatus is not complete. One
        can not assume that these represent ALL variations of the text. They are
        meant as quick reference editions to show the major known variants, not the
        extensive list of all variations. They also ignore spelling errors and
        minor orthographic differences in texts.

        Now to your question, Rahlf is a critical text handbook. He includes
        Vaticanus, Alexandrinus and Sinacticus in all cases and a number of other
        important witnesses. I've seen his text posted a few places, but not the
        apparatus to date.

        Swete is a diplomatic text handbook using Vaticanus as the base. A scanned
        version of Swete is available from the Christian Classics Ethereal library
        project here:

        http://www.ccel.org/s/swete/

        Both Brenton and Kohlenberger are just reading texts that have Vaticanus.
        Kolenberger takes his from the transcription prepared by Tischendorf.
        Tischendorf did produce a diplomatic text and several transcriptions during
        the 19th century. A number of these are available as scans on-line here:

        http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/Ebind/docs/TC/

        Unfortunately, Vaticanus diplomatic text is NT only at this point.
        Sinacticus transcription has some of the OT posted (including the Psalms).
        TC E-bind also has a few volumes of the Cambridge large edition LXX and a
        number of other manuscript transcriptions.

        These scanned versions take a while to navigate (especially for those of us
        on a dial-up), but if you don't have access to the volumes in a library they
        are better than nothing.

        Both of these sites include Swete's "Introduction to the OT in Greek" as
        well. Swete has a chapter on Manuscripts p 122-170 and printed editions p
        171-194. These are well worth the read even though it was written in 1904.

        Regards,

        Steve

        --
        Steve Puluka
        Master's Student
        SS Cyril & Methodius Seminary
        Pittsburgh, PA
        http://www.geocities.com/spuluka
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.