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

[tc-list] Re: John 3,25

Expand Messages
  • Thomas J. Kraus
    Lieber Tobias, auch im Kaesland wird mehr Textkritik betrieben als im Deutschland Joerg Haiders. Nachfolgende Antwort des grossen Jan Krans mag einige
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 14, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Lieber Tobias,

      auch im Kaesland wird mehr Textkritik betrieben als im
      Deutschland Joerg Haiders. Nachfolgende Antwort des grossen Jan
      Krans mag einige Antworten auf die besagten Literaturfragen
      geben. Ob die entsprechenden Titel in Regensburg vorhanden sind,
      checke ich noch rasch.

      Well, die boese Frau Kainz. Sogar damals hat sie nicht die
      entscheidenden Titel gekauft. So eine Flasche. Aber textkritisch
      hatte die noch nie viel drauf. Vielleicht reicht das Vertrauen auf die
      Angaben und ein nachgestellter Hinweis "ad loc" oder dergleichen.

      On 14 Feb 00, at 10:45, Jan Krans wrote:

      > Well, it's not that easy to find the information, but Bentley must of
      > course be Richard Bentley (1662-1727), see Metzger, The Text of the
      > New Testament, 3rd ed., p.109-110. The work Metzger refers to, The New
      > Testament in Greek and English... has to be the one in which you can
      > find the direct information by the Urheber of this conjecture. Not
      > having access to this book, I consulted Bowyer's Critical Conjectures
      > and Observations on the New Testament, 3rd ed. London 1782. There he
      > quotes Bentley and Markland in extenso (but how exact are these
      > quotations?).
      > According to Bentley, especially Markland (Jeremiah Marklandus
      > (Markland) 1693-1776, a classicist) made ample remarks on this
      > conjecture. His reasoning is as follows: 1. the original text must
      > have been [TWN] IHSOU. 2. the 'transcribers did not understand the
      > Ellipsis', i.e. they understood that 'a question arose between the
      > disciples of John and Jesus' instead of '... those of Jesus.' 3. 'it
      > seemed too insolent' to them, 'that the disciples of John should have
      > a dispute with Jesus, and therefore changed it into IOUDAIOU.' 4. this
      > is the text all (or almost all) manuscripts have, and that is 'utterly
      > inconsistent', so that conjectural emendation is needed. Markland's
      > conclusion however is thought-provoking (always as quoted by Bowyer):
      > '... IOUDAIWN, or IOUDAIOU, will, I believe, be found, upon more
      > accounts than one, utterly inconsistent, with the sense of the place.
      > But though I think IHSOU undoubtedly right, yet I would publish
      > IOUDAIOU according to the Mss.' In any case, Bentley must probably be
      > considered as the Urheber of the conjecture IHSOU, whereas Markland
      > seems willing to accept both IHSOU ad TWN IHSOU. In this sense, the
      > information in NA27 is not entirely correct. There are, by the way,
      > some interesting differences to be noted between NA25, NA26 and NA27
      > as far as this conjecture is concerned.
      > And Baldensperger? This must be Wilhelm (Guilielmus) Baldensperger
      > (1856-unknown), and - I guess - his conjecture is to be found in his
      > book Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums, Freiburg 1898. This
      > conjecture, however, according to NA25 and NA26, is only a slight
      > variation of Bentley's: TOU IHSOU. That's why his name is put between
      > brackets in NA27.
      > Jan Krans, Free University, Amsterdam
      > J.L.H.Krans@...




      You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
      To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.