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

Re: Books about Nestle-Aland.

Expand Messages
  • Nichael Cramer
    ... A most curious turn of phrase. ;-) N
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 3, 1997
    • 0 Attachment
      Robert B. Waltz wrote:

      > Seriously, if you believe in the UBS/NA text, [...]

      A most curious turn of phrase.


      ;-)

      N
    • Robert B. Waltz
      ... I suppose it is.... On the other hand, there seem to be people who rely on the UBS text with almost as much fervour as the TR advocates. Whereas I, while I
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 3, 1997
      • 0 Attachment
        On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, Nichael Cramer <nichael@...> wrote:

        >Robert B. Waltz wrote:
        >
        >> Seriously, if you believe in the UBS/NA text, [...]
        >
        >A most curious turn of phrase.
        >
        >
        >;-)
        >
        >N

        I suppose it is....

        On the other hand, there seem to be people who rely on the UBS text
        with almost as much fervour as the TR advocates. Whereas I, while I
        do not think it a bad text, am not fond of its theoretical
        underpinnings. So I tried to express my reservations, in my
        "curious" way. :-)

        If you listen to me long enough, I'm sure you will hear things
        "curiouser and curiouser." :-)

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

        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)
      • lakr
        ... Yes ! I for one am just getting used to my Nestle/Aland 27 and I am sure I am missing out on, or miss-understanding many of the features. Also, I was
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 3, 1997
        • 0 Attachment
          > BTW -- Another question for less experienced TCers on this list.
          > Should the ENTTC include an article on the merits (or lack thereof)
          > of the various NT editions (NA, UBS, Merk, W&H, Von Soden, etc.)
          > They all do have their strengths and weaknesses, and need some
          > knowledge to use. Is this something that concerns people?
          >
          > Robert B. Waltz
          > waltzmn@...
          >

          Yes ! I for one am just getting used to my Nestle/Aland 27 and I am
          sure I am missing out on, or miss-understanding many of the features.

          Also, I was under the impression that the UBS and NA were so
          close there is no benefit to owning both. Is that correct ?

          Larry Kruper
        • Robert B. Waltz
          ... Depends on what you want to use them for. As far as the *text* is concerned -- yes, the text is identical; no point in having both. So if you re just
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 3, 1997
          • 0 Attachment
            On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, lakr@... (lakr) wrote:

            >Also, I was under the impression that the UBS and NA were so
            >close there is no benefit to owning both. Is that correct ?
            >
            >Larry Kruper

            Depends on what you want to use them for. As far as the
            *text* is concerned -- yes, the text is identical; no
            point in having both. So if you're just looking up the
            readings of passages, either is fine (although UBS
            is probably easier to use).

            On the other hand, if you are interested in TC, then
            both are useful. UBS has a very limited number of variants,
            but they are generally important variants, and the apparatus
            includes many more important manuscripts. It is also an
            easier apparatus to understand.

            The NA apparatus, by contrast, has fewer manuscripts but
            more variants (though by no means a complete list, as
            a glance at Tischendorf or Von Soden -- or even Merk --
            will demonstrate). Thus if you really want to get
            a feeling for the text and its variants, NA is the
            way to go.

            For that matter, I think every aspiring textual critic
            should also have a copy of Merk. The apparatus is
            hard to understand, and has a lot of errors, but it
            has many more variants than NA, and also has a
            critical (if not always accurate) apparatus of the
            Latin.

            As far as the other major editions are concerned, Tischendorf
            is invaluable but hard to find. Von Soden can only be used
            if you have the appropriate Secret Decoder Ring (oops, I
            mean book :-). Souter has an easy-to-read apparatus,
            but the text is half-Byzantine, half-eclectic, and it
            doesn't note many variants. The same can be said for
            Vogels, and it doesn't even have the virtue of an
            easy-to-understand apparatus. Bover's apparatus is
            limited to points where other editions disagree.

            Next question? :-)

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

            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)
          • Matthew Johnson
            On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, lakr wrote: [snip] ... Not quite. It is the _text_ of NA and UBS that are almost identical. The critical apparatuses are quite different.
            Message 5 of 8 , Oct 17, 1997
            • 0 Attachment
              On Fri, 3 Oct 1997, lakr wrote:

              [snip]
              > Also, I was under the impression that the UBS and NA were so
              > close there is no benefit to owning both. Is that correct ?

              Not quite. It is the _text_ of NA and UBS that are almost
              identical. The critical apparatuses are quite different.

              I keep my UBS4 around for three reasons:
              1) the typeface is _so_ much more pleasant to read
              2) the patristic citations are more complete
              3) it has a punctuation apparatus.

              But to try to understand the history of the variants of any
              passage I use the NA's apparatus. Even that is incomplete
              and has been accused (not without some justification) of a
              strong "Alexandrian" bias.


              Matthew Johnson
              Waiting for the blessed hope and the appearance of the glory of our
              great God and Saviour Jesus Christ (Ti 2:13).
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.