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

Re: Textual Criticism Theories

Expand Messages
  • Carlton L. Winbery
    Jeremy Duff wrote in answer to Kevin; ... The statement by Kevin is probably an overstatement, for different writers seem to have had differing opinions about
    Message 1 of 1714 , Oct 22, 1996
    • 0 Attachment
      Jeremy Duff wrote in answer to Kevin;
      >>Part of the difficulty of the task is that we do not understand with
      >>certainty how we ended up with the texts that we have. Most agree that the
      >>majority of variants probably occurred prior to 325 CE., certainly before 500
      >>(?) CE. During this time, people did not understand the writings as scripture
      >>and there was little opportunity for comparison of MSS.
      >
      >I find this a little hard to believe. Church writers from the end of the
      >second century onwards at least see to have a definite conception of certain
      >texts being scripture. I would have thought it natural, given no evidence to
      >the contrary, that scribes would have also thought this. OK, there may not
      >be a fixed definitive canon, but that does not mean that the scribe who
      >copied say p46 did not think this was scripture. Indeed, various features
      >might point to the conclusion that he did - e.g. use of the codex form
      >(which seems more common for Christian scriptures than for the writings of
      >the church fathers, I think) and the use of the nomina sacra (can anyone
      >tell me if these are used in copies of the writings of church fathers? I
      >guess they probably are). Anyway, even without definite evidence that the
      >scribes did see the texts as scripture, I would have thought that their
      >status generally as evidenced by other writers would be enough to suggest
      >that scribes from the second century onwards did understand the writings as
      >scripture.
      >
      The statement by Kevin is probably an overstatement, for different writers
      seem to have had differing opinions about some to the later books.
      However, that was not the only factor that caused early variants. No doubt
      the edict of toleration in 311 helped give the Christians more time to
      think about mss. I don't think the fact that scribes used the codex form
      is significant. Many others did that. The great disparity between the
      ability of scribes is also evident.


      Carlton L. Winbery
      Fogleman Professor of Religion
      Louisiana College
      winberyc@...
      winbery@...
      Fax (318) 442-4996
      Phone (318) 487-7241
    • Julian Goldberg
      The complete Hebrew Scriptures (Hebrew Bible) or TANAKH (Torah-Law, Neviim-Prophets, Ketuvim-Writings) based on the Masoretic Hebrew text with vowels and
      Message 1714 of 1714 , Feb 4, 1997
      • 0 Attachment
        The complete Hebrew Scriptures (Hebrew Bible) or TANAKH (Torah-Law,
        Neviim-Prophets, Ketuvim-Writings) based on the Masoretic Hebrew text
        with vowels and cantillation marks in one complete compact black hard
        covered volume which measures 12 cm x 19 cm with over 1360 pages that
        have been arranged according to traditional chapter and verse divisions
        along with larger Hebrew letter printing and thicker paper pages for a
        volume of this size. Each book is $ 20.00 (U.S.) postpaid ($ 15.50 for
        the book plus $ 4.50 for postage) and can be ordered directly from:

        Julian Goldberg, 260 Adelaide St., E., # 215, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
        M5A 1N0.

        Thanks.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.