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

Correction re: 1 John 5:18

Expand Messages
  • Maurice Robinson
    I wrote in response to Matthew Johnson without thinking to go over the evidence, and ended up speaking erroneously off the top of my head in ... [snip] Mea
    Message 1 of 10 , Jun 21, 1997
    • 0 Attachment
      I wrote in response to Matthew Johnson without thinking to go over the
      evidence, and ended up speaking erroneously off the top of my head in
      regard to the wrong family group. Johnson wrote:

      >> Yet the "new" reading took over the entire family of 1739. How could
      >>this be if it was, as you propose, an isolated error, an error of only
      >>twelve scribes?

      I responded:

      >The last I recall, Fam.1739 was not the majority of MSS, and the entire
      >Fam.1739 evidence is _part_ of those twelve scribes being counted.

      [snip]

      Mea culpa....I did _not_ intend to speak of Fam.1739 as part of those 12
      MSS which differ from the majority reading. Fam.1739 here agrees with the
      Byzantine reading.

      I was thinking of the MSS of Fam.2138 which depart from the majority and
      read AUTON (there actually are 5 such MSS). If those 5 MSS were
      considered only to reflect the family archetype, then the total number of
      witnesses in favor of AUTON would be reduced to 12-5 = 7.

      The remainder of my discussion in my last post should be taken with this
      in mind, and, _mutatis mutandis_, should be dealing with Fam.2138 in the
      same context.

      However, I am therefore no longer certain I am addressing Johnson's
      comments, assuming he indeed was speaking of Fam.1739 and not Fam.2138 in
      his post -- If so, I confess I don't know _what_ he is referring to in his
      statement quoted above, since the Byzantine reading in my opinion did
      _not_ "take over" Fam.1739 at that point, nor did the Byzantine Textform
      as a whole "take over" that family or any family, as mentioned elsewhere
      in that post, else there would not be any "family" readings, but only the
      readings of the Byzantine text.

      My view in regard to Fam.1739 (not Fam.2138) at the 1 Jn.5:!8 reading is
      that the archetype of Fam.1739 simply read HEAUTON, and the AUTON reading
      was _never_ characteristic of that family at that variant unit. (I think
      Bob Waltz will agree with me on this). The same _cannot_ be said for the
      archetype of Fam.2138, which appears to have read AUTON, but of which
      reading 3 members (206 630 1611) _were_ corrected over to the Byzantine
      standard during the process of transmission.

      _________________________________________________________________________
      Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D. Professor of Greek and New Testament
      Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.