3470Re: [textualcriticism] lectionary mss relation to majority text
- Dec 13, 2007Yes, lectionaries are characterized by their form rather than their content, but where do you suppose the lectionaries arose if not from the pulpit bible? Since in an age when MSS were copied by hand there would be differences from one parish to another in the pulpit bible, there would also be differences in the lectionaries.george
gfsomselTherefore, O faithful Christian, search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus
_________----- Original Message ----
From: James Miller <jamtata@...>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 6:52:47 PM
Subject: [textualcriticism] lectionary mss relation to majority text
Some questions about the relation of the majority text
(Maj. T. hereafter) to lectionary mss. My reading in
Metzger and Aland leads me to believe that the
lectionaries are considered to contain a text very
close in character to the Maj. T. Have I understood
correctly what these authors have written and what is
the consensus among NT text critics regarding the Maj.
T. text-type and its relation to the lectionaries? If
so, I have a few questions in this connection.
First, an assertion: lectionaries are defined by their
form as opposed to their text type. They are
contrasted to continuous-text witnesses because their
content shows a different ordering with respect to the
form of continuous-text witnesses. I.e, the
lectionaries have their text arranged according to the
annual reading cycle of Byzantine Christianity, while
continuous-text witnesses have the text in the order
in which it is found in most modernly-published NT's
and in which each NT author originally composed his
work. Do I have this correct?
Additional reading in Metzger and Aland reveals that
not all mss. that were used as lectionaries
necessarily conform to the textual ordering of the
lectionaries as defined above. Metzger and Aland
mention, for example, continuous-reading witnesses
that have the beginning and ending of lections noted
in their margins (by, e.g., insertion of incipit and
excipit or words like arxh). One question I have in
this regard is as follows: what percentage of the
non-lectionary mss. contain such lection indicators?
I will save further questions for subsequent entries
in this thread, in case it provokes some discussion.
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>