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

Re: tc-list Has anyone attended Westar Institute Fall Meeting

Expand Messages
  • Roderic L. Mullen
    If what you ahve heard is accurate, this must be a VERY recently discovered papyrus. For those who are interested, the most recent bibliography I know of on
    Message 1 of 15 , Nov 1, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      If what you ahve heard is accurate, this must be a VERY recently discovered
      papyrus. For those who are interested, the most recent bibliography I know
      of on Christian papyri is the thorough listing by Cornelia Romer,
      "Christliche Texte (1989-August 1996)," in ARCHIV FUR PAPYRUSFORSCHUNG, 43.1
      (1997): 107-145.
      --Rod Mullen.

      At 06:37 PM 11/1/98 -0000, you wrote:
      >Fall 1998
      >October 2125, 1998
      >Flamingo Hotel, Santa Rosa, California
      >
      >Paul A. Mirecki and Charles W. Hedrick upcoming book on the recently found
      >papiry ( a previouslly unknown dialogue-sayings gospel ) in a german
      >Egyptian Museum was suposed to be presented there.
      >
      >Anyone has any info?
      >
      >
      >
    • Jim West
      ... Yuri- the answer seems simple- the RSV gives the text attested in the best and oldest mss whereas the KJV and the other versions have expanded the text
      Message 2 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
      • 0 Attachment
        At 01:20 PM 11/2/98 -0500, you wrote:
        >
        >Dear friends,
        >
        >I'm now trying to determine who exactly were the opponents criticised in 1
        >Jn 4:1-3.
        >
        >
        >But in the case of v. 3 the Greek text seems to be rather uncertain. I've
        >looked at the variants, but I'm still not sure which variant may be the
        >more reliable.
        >
        >English translations of v. 3 are divided. Some, like RSV above, and the
        >more recent translations in general, say
        >
        >"...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God"
        >
        >But KJV, Darby, and YLT translate more like
        >
        >"...every spirit which does not confess that Jesus Christ came in flesh is
        >not of God"
        >
        >Perhaps someone can clarify this for me. Why has RSV chosen to go with
        >"...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God", and not the
        >other translation?
        >
        >Thanks in advance.
        >
        >Yuri.


        Yuri- the answer seems simple- the RSV gives the text attested in the best
        and oldest mss whereas the KJV and the other versions have expanded the text
        (based, to be sure, on expansions in various Greek mss).

        This is one of those places where the various scribes just tried to make
        clear something they perceived as unclear. Either way, the point remains
        the same--- those who, like the proto-gnostics- deny the authenticity of the
        incarnation are not to be believed... that is, it seems to me, John's point
        plain and simple- textual variants here arose simply to make that plain.


        Best,

        Jim

        +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        Jim West, ThD
        Quartz Hill School of Theology
        jwest@...

        de mortuis nihil nisi baloni!
      • Michael Holmes
        ... In March, 1997, there was an announcement in the press about a new find by Mirecki and Hedrick; I pass along the following as I received it. Sounds like
        Message 3 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
        • 0 Attachment
          At 06:37 PM 11/1/98 -0000, Julio Anjos inquired:
          >Fall 1998
          >October 2125, 1998
          >Flamingo Hotel, Santa Rosa, California
          >
          >Paul A. Mirecki and Charles W. Hedrick upcoming book on the recently found
          >papiry ( a previouslly unknown dialogue-sayings gospel ) in a german
          >Egyptian Museum was suposed to be presented there.
          >
          >Anyone has any info?
          >

          In March, 1997, there was an announcement in the press about a "new find" by
          Mirecki and Hedrick; I pass along the following as I received it. Sounds
          like it is the document Julio is inquiring about

          Mike Holmes
          Bethel College

          *************************************************
          >
          >KANSAS CITY, Mo. (Reuter) - In a rare finding that could
          >shed light on the origins of Christianity, an American professor
          >said Tuesday that he and a colleague have identified fragments
          >of a ``lost gospel'' that contains conversations between Jesus
          >Christ and his disciples.
          > Paul Mirecki, associate professor of religious studies at
          >the University of Kansas, said he is confident the text is an
          >authentic early account of the teachings of Christ. If true,
          >this would mark the first time since 1945 that a so-called lost
          >gospel has been identified.
          > Mirecki said that apart from the New Testament's four
          >Gospels, scholars recognize approximately six other lost gospels
          >that detail Christ's teachings. The gospel of Thomas, discovered
          >in Egypt in 1945, was the last such text to be identified,
          >Mirecki said.
          > Mirecki happened on this manuscript in 1991 in the vast
          >holdings of Berlin's Egyptian Museum, but it has taken him until
          >now to piece together the document's content. He does not know
          >how the manuscript found its way to the museum.
          > A specialist in paleography, or ancient modes of writing,
          >Mirecki said he was confident the item was not a fraud or a
          >forgery. ``It's definitely an ancient manuscript -- fourth or
          >fifth century,'' Mirecki told Reuters in an interview.
          > The newly found gospel was written in the first or second
          >century, he said. ``The context here is there were many gospels
          >written in the first two centuries,'' Mirecki said. ``This text
          >is ... identical to similar texts that are called gospels. It
          >fits the literary pattern and the contents.''
          > Mirecki has been editing and translating the manuscript with
          >Charles Hedrick, professor of religious studies at Southwest
          >Missouri State University in Springfield, Missouri.
          > Each man studied the manuscript independently while working
          >at the Berlin museum. After a chance encounter at a 1995
          >convention in Philadelphia they realized they were working on
          >the same project and decided to collaborate. Their book on the
          >new gospel will be published this summer by Brill Publishers in
          >the Netherlands.
          > Mirecki said the manuscript is written in Coptic, an ancient
          >Egyptian language that uses Greek letters. It was probably the
          >work of a Christian minority group called Gnostics, or knowers,
          >he said, and recounts a rare ``dialogue gospel'' of
          >conversations between Jesus and his disciples that supposedly
          >took place after Christ was resurrected.
          > He said the text and its message indicate Christianity's
          >origins were more diverse than what medieval historians have
          >described.
          > ``This is simply evidence of minority groups that existed
          >and that either were brought into the larger church -- the
          >Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches -- or died out. Quite
          >often they were persecuted to the point of death,'' he said.
          > Only 15 pages remain of the manuscript. Mirecki said it was
          >probably the victim of an orthodox book burning in about the
          >fifth century.
          > Specifically, the gospel espouses a stronger focus on
          >individual knowledge, urging its readers to reject the confines
          >of institutional religion. ``It's a non-orthodox text ...
          >Salvation comes to these people through knowledge rather than
          >faith,'' Mirecki said.
          > ``They see orthodox Jews and Christians as being duped by
          >the evil creator of the material universe. They had a very
          >different mythology ... one that could not be incorporated into
          >the larger Catholic church and had to be rejected.''
          > For example, one passage unique to the gospel reads, ``I
          >have overcome the Cosmos, so don't let the Cosmos overcome
          >you.''
          > ``That type of theology is not what developing orthodoxy
          >wanted to hear,'' Mirecki said. ``They wanted to promote
          >salvation in the Church, not in one's personal experience.''
          > Mirecki said he will present a paper on his findings at an
          >academic symposium in November in San Francisco.
          >
          **********************************
        • William L. Petersen
          Michael Holmes is correct: Mierecki and Hedrick announced this papyrus more than a year ago. It was noted in some major newspapers both here and abroad. In
          Message 4 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
          • 0 Attachment
            Michael Holmes is correct: Mierecki and Hedrick announced this papyrus
            more than a year ago. It was noted in some major newspapers both here and
            abroad. In the Netherlands, I know the NRC Handelsblat (their equivalent
            of the NYTimes; the paper of record) ran a piece on it in their weekend
            "CS" ["Cultural Supplement") section, and interviewed--among others--Prof.
            Henk Jan de Jonge of Leiden for his reaction. He, along with virtually
            everyone else I've spoken with, have described it as another secondary,
            derivative, apocryphal text (akin in many ways to some of the Nag Hammadi
            stuff, qua genre), with nothing new (at least insofar as can be determined
            now) to contribute to research. This is why few have heard of it: it
            doesn't appear to be significant, despite the discoverers' excitement.

            My recollection is that the "symposium in San Francisco" where the
            presentation was made not the Westar Institute "fall meeting," as Julio
            Anjos suggested, but the annual AAR/SBL meeting.

            --Petersen, Penn State University.


            >In March, 1997, there was an announcement in the press about a "new find" by
            >Mirecki and Hedrick; I pass along the following as I received it. Sounds
            >like it is the document Julio is inquiring about
            >
            >Mike Holmes
            >Bethel College
            >
            >*************************************************
            >>
            >>KANSAS CITY, Mo. (Reuter) - In a rare finding that could
            >>shed light on the origins of Christianity, an American professor
            >>said Tuesday that he and a colleague have identified fragments
            >>of a ``lost gospel'' that contains conversations between Jesus
            >>Christ and his disciples.
            >> Paul Mirecki, associate professor of religious studies at
            >>the University of Kansas, said he is confident the text is an
            >>authentic early account of the teachings of Christ. If true,
            >>this would mark the first time since 1945 that a so-called lost
            >>gospel has been identified.
            >> Mirecki said that apart from the New Testament's four
            >>Gospels, scholars recognize approximately six other lost gospels
            >>that detail Christ's teachings. The gospel of Thomas, discovered
            >>in Egypt in 1945, was the last such text to be identified,
            >>Mirecki said.
            >> Mirecki happened on this manuscript in 1991 in the vast
            >>holdings of Berlin's Egyptian Museum, but it has taken him until
            >>now to piece together the document's content. He does not know
            >>how the manuscript found its way to the museum.
            >> A specialist in paleography, or ancient modes of writing,
            >>Mirecki said he was confident the item was not a fraud or a
            >>forgery. ``It's definitely an ancient manuscript -- fourth or
            >>fifth century,'' Mirecki told Reuters in an interview.
            >> The newly found gospel was written in the first or second
            >>century, he said. ``The context here is there were many gospels
            >>written in the first two centuries,'' Mirecki said. ``This text
            >>is ... identical to similar texts that are called gospels. It
            >>fits the literary pattern and the contents.''
            >> Mirecki has been editing and translating the manuscript with
            >>Charles Hedrick, professor of religious studies at Southwest
            >>Missouri State University in Springfield, Missouri.
            >> Each man studied the manuscript independently while working
            >>at the Berlin museum. After a chance encounter at a 1995
            >>convention in Philadelphia they realized they were working on
            >>the same project and decided to collaborate. Their book on the
            >>new gospel will be published this summer by Brill Publishers in
            >>the Netherlands.
            >> Mirecki said the manuscript is written in Coptic, an ancient
            >>Egyptian language that uses Greek letters. It was probably the
            >>work of a Christian minority group called Gnostics, or knowers,
            >>he said, and recounts a rare ``dialogue gospel'' of
            >>conversations between Jesus and his disciples that supposedly
            >>took place after Christ was resurrected.
            >> He said the text and its message indicate Christianity's
            >>origins were more diverse than what medieval historians have
            >>described.
            >> ``This is simply evidence of minority groups that existed
            >>and that either were brought into the larger church -- the
            >>Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches -- or died out. Quite
            >>often they were persecuted to the point of death,'' he said.
            >> Only 15 pages remain of the manuscript. Mirecki said it was
            >>probably the victim of an orthodox book burning in about the
            >>fifth century.
            >> Specifically, the gospel espouses a stronger focus on
            >>individual knowledge, urging its readers to reject the confines
            >>of institutional religion. ``It's a non-orthodox text ...
            >>Salvation comes to these people through knowledge rather than
            >>faith,'' Mirecki said.
            >> ``They see orthodox Jews and Christians as being duped by
            >>the evil creator of the material universe. They had a very
            >>different mythology ... one that could not be incorporated into
            >>the larger Catholic church and had to be rejected.''
            >> For example, one passage unique to the gospel reads, ``I
            >>have overcome the Cosmos, so don't let the Cosmos overcome
            >>you.''
            >> ``That type of theology is not what developing orthodoxy
            >>wanted to hear,'' Mirecki said. ``They wanted to promote
            >>salvation in the Church, not in one's personal experience.''
            >> Mirecki said he will present a paper on his findings at an
            >>academic symposium in November in San Francisco.
            >>
            >**********************************
            >
          • Yuri Kuchinsky
            Dear friends, I m now trying to determine who exactly were the opponents criticised in 1 Jn 4:1-3. Here s the RSV translation: 1 Beloved, do not believe every
            Message 5 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear friends,

              I'm now trying to determine who exactly were the opponents criticised in 1
              Jn 4:1-3.

              Here's the RSV translation:

              1
              Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the
              spirits to see whether they are of God; for many
              false prophets have gone out into the world.
              2
              By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit
              which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the
              flesh is of God,
              3
              and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not
              of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which
              you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the
              world already.

              The text of v. 2 seems quite clear, and according to this, the opponents
              of the writer seem to be Docetists (or Marcionites) who claimed that Jesus
              Christ only "appeared" to come in the flesh.

              But in the case of v. 3 the Greek text seems to be rather uncertain. I've
              looked at the variants, but I'm still not sure which variant may be the
              more reliable.

              English translations of v. 3 are divided. Some, like RSV above, and the
              more recent translations in general, say

              "...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God"

              But KJV, Darby, and YLT translate more like

              "...every spirit which does not confess that Jesus Christ came in flesh is
              not of God"

              Perhaps someone can clarify this for me. Why has RSV chosen to go with
              "...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God", and not the
              other translation?

              Thanks in advance.

              Yuri.
            • Bart Ehrman
              Don t think the opponents could be Marcionites, unless you *really* late-date the letter (or prefer not to follow the still-standard-and-for-good-reason line
              Message 6 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
              • 0 Attachment
                Don't think the opponents could be Marcionites, unless you *really*
                late-date the letter (or prefer not to follow the
                still-standard-and-for-good-reason line on the dates of marcion).

                I've dealt with the textual problem at length in my _Orthodox
                Corruption of Scripture_ pp. 125-35, if you want to see the evidence,
                arguments, and counterarguments. (I push strongly for _me homologei_
                against _luei_).

                -- Bart Ehrman
                University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


                On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

                >
                > Dear friends,
                >
                > I'm now trying to determine who exactly were the opponents criticised in 1
                > Jn 4:1-3.
                >
                > Here's the RSV translation:
                >
                > 1
                > Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the
                > spirits to see whether they are of God; for many
                > false prophets have gone out into the world.
                > 2
                > By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit
                > which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the
                > flesh is of God,
                > 3
                > and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not
                > of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which
                > you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the
                > world already.
                >
                > The text of v. 2 seems quite clear, and according to this, the opponents
                > of the writer seem to be Docetists (or Marcionites) who claimed that Jesus
                > Christ only "appeared" to come in the flesh.
                >
                > But in the case of v. 3 the Greek text seems to be rather uncertain. I've
                > looked at the variants, but I'm still not sure which variant may be the
                > more reliable.
                >
                > English translations of v. 3 are divided. Some, like RSV above, and the
                > more recent translations in general, say
                >
                > "...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God"
                >
                > But KJV, Darby, and YLT translate more like
                >
                > "...every spirit which does not confess that Jesus Christ came in flesh is
                > not of God"
                >
                > Perhaps someone can clarify this for me. Why has RSV chosen to go with
                > "...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God", and not the
                > other translation?
                >
                > Thanks in advance.
                >
                > Yuri.
                >
                >
              • lakr
                ... I do not have my Nestle Aland with me at the moment, but the translatins are different because the textus receptus which underlies the KJV is different
                Message 7 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
                • 0 Attachment
                  >
                  >
                  > Dear friends,
                  >
                  > I'm now trying to determine who exactly were the opponents criticised in 1
                  > Jn 4:1-3.
                  >
                  > Here's the RSV translation:
                  >
                  > 1
                  > Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the
                  > spirits to see whether they are of God; for many
                  > false prophets have gone out into the world.
                  > 2
                  > By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit
                  > which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the
                  > flesh is of God,
                  > 3
                  > and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not
                  > of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which
                  > you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the
                  > world already.
                  >
                  > The text of v. 2 seems quite clear, and according to this, the opponents
                  > of the writer seem to be Docetists (or Marcionites) who claimed that Jesus
                  > Christ only "appeared" to come in the flesh.
                  >
                  > But in the case of v. 3 the Greek text seems to be rather uncertain. I've
                  > looked at the variants, but I'm still not sure which variant may be the
                  > more reliable.
                  >
                  > English translations of v. 3 are divided. Some, like RSV above, and the
                  > more recent translations in general, say
                  >
                  > "...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God"
                  >
                  > But KJV, Darby, and YLT translate more like
                  >
                  > "...every spirit which does not confess that Jesus Christ came in flesh is
                  > not of God"
                  >
                  > Perhaps someone can clarify this for me. Why has RSV chosen to go with
                  > "...every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God", and not the
                  > other translation?
                  >
                  > Thanks in advance.
                  >
                  > Yuri.
                  >

                  I do not have my Nestle Aland with me at the moment, but the translatins
                  are different because the textus receptus which underlies the KJV
                  is different that the texts which are derived from the science of
                  Textual Criticism.

                  I can give both texts here but cannot comment on exactly which
                  manuscripts follow which tradition.

                  1Jo 4:3 TR
                  KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                  [ XRISTON EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA ]
                  EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                  OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH


                  1Jo 4:3 W&H
                  KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                  EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                  OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH

                  Notice that in the top example the words 'Christ in flesh came' are inserted
                  into the Textus Receptus.

                  The RSV does not follow the TR Greek text.

                  Hope this helps,
                  Larry Kruper
                • Prof. Ron Minton
                  ... Can someone check to see if the few mss. Erasmus used have the words or did he use another source? They are in Aleph [kurion instead of christon] which,
                  Message 8 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, lakr wrote:
                    > 1Jo 4:3 TR
                    > KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                    > [ XRISTON EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA ]
                    > EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                    > OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH
                    >
                    > 1Jo 4:3 W&H
                    > KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                    > EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                    > OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH
                    >
                    > Notice that in the top example the words 'Christ in flesh came' are
                    > inserted into the Textus Receptus.

                    Can someone check to see if the few mss. Erasmus used have the words or
                    did he use another source? They are in Aleph [kurion instead of christon]
                    which, of course, he did not have.

                    Ron Minton
                    5379 North Farm Road 179
                    Springfield, MO 65803
                    (417)833-9581
                  • Prof. Ron Minton
                    We have all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the
                    Message 9 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
                    • 0 Attachment
                      We have all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters
                      will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare.
                      Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

                      Ron Minton
                    • Kevin W. Woodruff
                      Ron: The TR reading is also the reading of the majority of the Byzantine manuscripts ... Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div. Library Director/Reference Librarian Cierpke
                      Message 10 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Ron:

                        The TR reading is also the reading of the majority of the Byzantine manuscripts


                        At 02:11 PM 11/2/98 -0600, you wrote:
                        >On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, lakr wrote:
                        >> 1Jo 4:3 TR
                        >> KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                        >> [ XRISTON EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA ]
                        >> EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                        >> OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH
                        >>
                        >> 1Jo 4:3 W&H
                        >> KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                        >> EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                        >> OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH
                        >>
                        >> Notice that in the top example the words 'Christ in flesh came' are
                        >> inserted into the Textus Receptus.
                        >
                        >Can someone check to see if the few mss. Erasmus used have the words or
                        >did he use another source? They are in Aleph [kurion instead of christon]
                        >which, of course, he did not have.
                        >
                        >Ron Minton
                        >5379 North Farm Road 179
                        >Springfield, MO 65803
                        >(417)833-9581
                        >
                        >

                        Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div.
                        Library Director/Reference Librarian
                        Cierpke Memorial Library
                        Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary
                        1815 Union Ave.
                        Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404
                        United States of America
                        423/493-4252 (office)
                        423/698-9447 (home)
                        423/493-4497 (FAX)
                        Cierpke@... (preferred)
                        kwoodruf@... (alternate)
                        http://web.utk.edu/~kwoodruf/woodruff.htm
                      • Robert B. Waltz
                        ... While I heartily agree with the sentiment, I have to point out that this has not actually been tested. The key word is *eventually*. I won t go into the
                        Message 11 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Prof. Ron Minton" <rminton@...> wrote:

                          >We have all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters
                          >will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare.
                          >Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

                          While I heartily agree with the sentiment, I have to point out that
                          this has not actually been tested. The key word is *eventually*.

                          I won't go into the math -- my calculator doesn't run that high --
                          but the odds of the monkeys doing the job in any given period of
                          time are extremely low. We'd need something like the lifetime of
                          the universe to conduct the test.

                          While we have our million monkeys, and more, we haven't had the time.

                          Besides, the monkey are supposed to type *random* letters. The people
                          driving the Internet don't type random letters. They type things they
                          think are meaningful. Net result: They will probably *never* manage
                          the complete works of Shakespeare. The average Internet user isn't
                          nearly as smart as random chance. :-)
                          -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                          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)
                        • Kevin W. Woodruff
                          Codices of manuscripts used by Erasmus for his first edition (1516) Most of these codices are at the University Library at the University of Basel, Switzerland
                          Message 12 of 15 , Nov 2, 1998
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Codices of manuscripts used by Erasmus for his first edition (1516)

                            Most of these codices are at the University Library at the University of
                            Basel, Switzerland

                            Evan. 2
                            15th century or earlier. According to Scrivener "is the the inferior
                            manuscript chiefly used by Erasmus for his first edition of the N.T. (1516)."

                            Act. Paul 2
                            13th or 14th century according to Burgon. Erasmus grounded on this
                            copy in some passages with some alterations of the manuscripts the text of
                            his first edition

                            Paul. 7
                            date not known

                            Evan.Act.Paul 1
                            12th or 13th century according to Burgon

                            Act.Paul 4
                            15th century according to Scrivener, most likely 12th century
                            Apoc. 1
                            12th century according to Scrivener


                            At 02:11 PM 11/2/98 -0600, you wrote:
                            >On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, lakr wrote:
                            >> 1Jo 4:3 TR
                            >> KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                            >> [ XRISTON EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA ]
                            >> EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                            >> OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH
                            >>
                            >> 1Jo 4:3 W&H
                            >> KAI PAN PNEUMA O MH OMOLOGEI TON IHSOUN
                            >> EK TOU QEOU OUK ESTIN KAI TOUTO ESTIN TO TOU ANTIXRISTOU O AKHKOATE
                            >> OTI ERXETAI KAI NUN EN TW KOSMW ESTIN HDH
                            >>
                            >> Notice that in the top example the words 'Christ in flesh came' are
                            >> inserted into the Textus Receptus.
                            >
                            >Can someone check to see if the few mss. Erasmus used have the words or
                            >did he use another source? They are in Aleph [kurion instead of christon]
                            >which, of course, he did not have.
                            >
                            >Ron Minton
                            >5379 North Farm Road 179
                            >Springfield, MO 65803
                            >(417)833-9581
                            >
                            >

                            Kevin W. Woodruff, M.Div.
                            Library Director/Reference Librarian
                            Cierpke Memorial Library
                            Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary
                            1815 Union Ave.
                            Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404
                            United States of America
                            423/493-4252 (office)
                            423/698-9447 (home)
                            423/493-4497 (FAX)
                            Cierpke@... (preferred)
                            kwoodruf@... (alternate)
                            http://web.utk.edu/~kwoodruf/woodruff.htm
                          • Julio Anjos
                            Info on the book can be found on: http://westarinstitute.org/Books/Author/Savior/savior.html I have mine ordered sice August. More info on the find can be
                            Message 13 of 15 , Nov 3, 1998
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Info on the book can be found on:
                              http://westarinstitute.org/Books/Author/Savior/savior.html
                              I have mine ordered sice August.

                              More info on the find can be found in:
                              http://scholar.cc.emory.edu/scripts/jv/rsn_may_gosp.html
                              But in short the facts are:

                              Designated the Berlin Manuscript P. 22220, the manuscript is comprised of
                              approximately thirty fragments, which are the remains of at least eighteen
                              parchment leaves. The fragments range in size from a few centimeters square
                              to at least one complete, though damaged, sheet comprising two leaves. One
                              or two fragments show evidence of having been burned. Hedrick and Mirecki
                              estimate on codicological grounds that the fragments come from leaves 97114
                              of the original codex.
                              ...
                              Written in Coptic, the document is probably a translation of an original
                              Greek text. Hedrick describes the Coptic as a rather pure example of the
                              Sahidic dialect, with only one possible Achmimic variant extant.
                              ....
                              . The Lord is portrayed as speaking with his apostles, and the names
                              James, John, and Andrew are extant.


                              As far as I know there are new sayings strong in gnostic imagery, and new
                              versions like:
                              Whoever is near me is near the fire; whoever is far from me is far from
                              life. A slightly different version of the same saying is attested in the
                              Gospel of Thomas, logion 82: Whoever is near me is near the fire; whoever
                              is far from me is far from the kingdom.


                              The info on the Westar Fall 1998 Meeting where the first presentation was to
                              be made was removed once the meeting was held, but it stated very clearly
                              both authours were to be there.

                              Best regards.
                              Julio
                            • Yuri Kuchinsky
                              ... Dear Bart, I have read your treatment now, and I agree with you on some points, while disagree on others. We agree that the opponents in 1Jn 4:1-3 are
                              Message 14 of 15 , Nov 3, 1998
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Mon, 2 Nov 1998, Bart Ehrman wrote:

                                > I've dealt with the textual problem at length in my _Orthodox
                                > Corruption of Scripture_ pp. 125-35, if you want to see the evidence,
                                > arguments, and counterarguments. (I push strongly for _me homologei_
                                > against _luei_).

                                Dear Bart,

                                I have read your treatment now, and I agree with you on some points, while
                                disagree on others.

                                We agree that the opponents in 1Jn 4:1-3 are docetists. But your treatment
                                of this passage focuses primarily on _me homologei_ against _luei_
                                problem. For all I can see you're right on this, but this does not really
                                seem relevant to the issues I'm dealing with at this time.

                                There are many interpretative problems with 1Jn. I've just read Anchor BD
                                (1992) article on the Johannine epistles by Robert Kysar, and he admits
                                that plenty is disputed as to authorship, context, and dating. According
                                to him,

                                "The dates of the documents can be fixed only approximately."

                                He, himself, gives ca. 100, but other opinions are possible.

                                Now, the question as to whether the opponents in 1Jn 4:1-3 are Marcionites
                                is not directly relevant to my larger thesis, and depends on the dating. I
                                think it is possible to date the epistles to mid-second century, and I
                                prefer such later dating.

                                My larger thesis is that there are two distinct sets of opponents
                                discernable in 1Jn, and this has been argued by a number of commentators.
                                You mention Smalley yourself. According to such a view, some opponents are
                                Ebionites, and have low Christology. These are the opponents in 1Jn
                                2:18-23. Others, in 1Jn 4:1-3, and in 2Jn, are docetists with high
                                Christology.

                                You don't like this sort of an interpretation, but I disagree on this. I'm
                                just taking the most literal reading of these passages, and this is what
                                the texts seem to say to me. I have a more detailed treatment of these
                                matters that I posted to Synoptic-l in the last few days.

                                http://www.egroups.com/list/synoptic-l/1253.html

                                and

                                http://www.egroups.com/list/synoptic-l/1259.html

                                Johannine correspondence is only a part of my larger argument in these two
                                long articles that deal mostly with Papias and Irenaeus.

                                I see no real need to conflate the opponents in 1Jn 2:18-23, and in 1Jn
                                4:1-3 like you tend to. But this question is very complex, since it
                                involves the exact understanding of various Christologies. In spite of
                                many apparent similarities between the two, I think there was a pretty
                                clear distinction between the much earlier group of
                                Ebionites/Adoptionists, and the rather later docetists, although this
                                distinction is often neglected by scholars.

                                On this, see M. Goulder, ST. PAUL VERSUS ST. PETER: A TALE OF TWO
                                MISSIONS, Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995, p. 117. (Goulder uses the
                                term Possessionist to describe Adoptionists.) He points out that, while in
                                mainstream academic literature "Adoptionists" are often conflated with
                                "Docetists", according to him this is confusing, and he advocates defining
                                these terms more precisely.

                                It was the Adoptionists/Possessionists who resisted identifying Jesus with
                                Christ, just like the opponents in 1Jn 2:22.

                                Now, the question that I posted to tc-list originally only focused on the
                                reading of 4:3a, which, in itself, is a rather narrow problem that does
                                not need to involve larger issues, since the interpretation of 4:2 is
                                already pretty clear.

                                According to Kevin, the longer reading comes mostly from the Byzantine
                                mss. Whether or not XRISTON EN SARKI ELHLUQOTA was added later, or was
                                edited out later, still seems not too clear to me. In any case, the phrase
                                just seems to fit the meaning of the passage rather well.

                                Best wishes,

                                Yuri.

                                Yuri Kuchinsky || Toronto

                                http://www.trends.net/~yuku/bbl/bbl.htm
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.