Re: Future subjunctive
- View SourceOn Wed, 31 Jan 1996, Carlton Winbery wrote:
> Maurice Robinson wrote;The problem in such a supposition (basically Aland's "Byzantine Imperial
> >The continued use and perpetuation of the Byzantine text remained centered
> >in Greece and Asia Minor throughout the entire period of Greek MS
> But this was a standardized regulated text and not a free flowing text
> where later scribes were free to correct and edit according to known mss
> but followed an ecclesiastical text.
Text" or Westcott-Hort's "Syrian Recension" hypothesis) is that there is
absolutely NO record of any enforced or voluntary effort to "standardize"
the Byzantine Textform; and indeed, the multifarious variations and
sub-groups within the K-text (e.g. K1, Kr, Kc,b Ka Kpi, etc.) point in a
direction favoring little or no control or standardization. Basically,
the Byzantine Text merely "continued" in the various lines of
transmission through which it was perpetuated, with no serious effort
The Byzantine-era scribes certainly were more precise in their copying
than had been the more primitive scribes and monks during the period of
the "uncontrolled popular text" in the era before AD 200 and even before
the legitimization of Christianity under Constantine. The one benefit
the Empire provided after Constantine was an unhurried freedom to simply
perpetuate and multiply the manuscript copies.
> In the later part of the period itIn the later part of which period? The 12th-15th centuries, or something
> was virtually limited to the old Kingdom of Nicaea in a very limited area.
earlier. Basically, so long as Greek was spoken and understood as a
liturgical language within Greek monasteries (whether in Italy, Greece,
Asia Minor, or Palestine), the basic Byzantine Textform would continue to
be perpetuated by the scribes in a manner which remained fairly
even-handed for over a thousand years.
> The editions of Erasmus plus those of Beza and Stephanus did bring theOh, absolutely. Erasmus especially added in a number of readings which
> Greek closer to the Vulgate, note the Comma Iohannum.
lacked Greek MS support from the Vulgate. But this has no bearing on
your initial claim, which was arguing that the influence of the Byzantine
text went the other direction, and affected Western Biblical
Christianity. But, as you note, on the contrary, it was Latin Biblical
Christianity which affected (corrupted) the Byzantine Greek itself in the
> MacGregor andAgain, exactly to my point on this matter. Evidence that the Greek MSS
> Bratton have also talked of influences earlier than that. In the period
> right before the reformation, there is some evidence that the Latin
> affected some Byzantine mss, eg. the 12th century mss where I John 5:7-8 is
> translated out of Latin into the margin in Greek with no articles. There
> is strong evidence of influence from Latin to Greek if not from Greek to
or text affected Latin MSS in the West after the emergence of the printed
Greek text so far as I know is utterly lacking. The most evidence I
think can be alleged is some cross-pollination among bilingual
Greco-Latin codices, such as Bezae.
- View SourceThe 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