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

Re: Studies in the text of Acts

Expand Messages
  • DC PARKER
    Most of the interest in 1739 is in its text of Paul, where it is derived from ancient materials. Acts is a different matter altogether. DC PARKER DEPT OF
    Message 1 of 2 , May 1, 1997
      Most of the interest in 1739 is in its text of Paul, where it is
      derived from ancient materials. Acts is a
      different matter altogether.

      DC PARKER
      DEPT OF THEOLOGY
      UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM
      TEL. 0121-414 3613
      FAX 0121-414 6866
      E-MAIL PARKERDC@...
    • Robert B. Waltz
      ... I know that this is a common conclusion based on the colophons. But it s not that simple. There is unquestionably a family of manuscripts of which 1739 is
      Message 2 of 2 , May 1, 1997
        On Thu, 1 May 1997, "DC PARKER" <PARKERDC@...> wrote:

        >Most of the interest in 1739 is in its text of Paul, where it is
        >derived from ancient materials. Acts is a
        >different matter altogether.

        I know that this is a common conclusion based on the colophons.
        But it's not that simple.

        There is unquestionably a family of manuscripts of which 1739 is the
        best. It is *not*, however, the ancestor of the family (although it
        may well be the ancestor of 0121).

        It is true that 1739's allies vary a bit from section to section --
        e.g. 945 is an ally in Acts and the Catholics, but not in Paul; 630
        is an ally in Acts and parts of Paul but not the Catholics.

        However, no clear dividing line can be drawn between these sections.
        1881, 1739's strongest ally, is an ally in both Paul and the Catholics
        (it does not contain Acts).

        I concede that 1739 may be somewhat weaker in Acts than in Paul.
        But in the Catholics, it heads a family (323, 945, 1241, 2298, etc.) of
        high antiquity and great value. It is worth noting that no less a
        witness than C is affiliated with 1739 in the Catholics. (See Amphoux,
        or compare the collations in NA27.) I don't say they are identical,
        but C is closer to 1739 than to Aleph A B.

        -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

        Robert B. Waltz
        waltzmn@...

        Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
        Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
        (A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.