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

Re: When Is A Neutral Reading Not Neutral?

Expand Messages
  • voxverax
    Dear Malcolm, MR3: ... The whole idea of the necessity of some recension and archtypical representation is historically invalid. Are you saying that you do
    Message 1 of 27 , Aug 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Malcolm,

      MR3: ... "The whole idea of the necessity of some recension and
      archtypical representation is historically invalid."

      Are you saying that you do not believe that there was ever a Syrian
      Recension?

      MR3: "Eusebius points this out about Lucian's alledged recension
      (most English translations omit this section)."

      We're getting away from the subject of tinted nomenclature, but I am
      wondering what statement by Eusebius you have in mind, and what you
      think it means. (Metzger wrote a nice essay about this in NTTS.)

      MR3: "In addition the use of Alexandrian lump sums the distictive
      qualties of the Neutral with the Alexandrian. It blurs and confuses."

      Not at all; it brings things into focus by implying a sequence: the
      "Alexandrian" Text emerged from the Proto-Alexandrian Text. For
      instance: P75 is Proto-Alexandrian. 1241 is a mixed Alexandrian,
      not Proto-Alexandrian, witness.

      MR3: "The *Proto-Alexandrian* will also mislead in that it's
      geographical (hint)tint will bypass and obviate all other and more
      probable (IMHO) provenances - in particular Greece and the Ionian
      coastal borders as well as inland Asia minor."

      Only if one interprets the names as indicative of the area where the
      texts originated rather than where they were primarily used. The
      Proto-Alexandrian Text is the base-text of the earliest strata of the
      Sahidic Version. That indicates that the Proto-Alexandrian Text is,
      if not the local text of Alexandria, at least a local text somewhere
      in Egypt. And when one looks at the somewhat later Egyptian versions
      (Bohairic, Ethiopic), their base-text appears to be Alexandrian;
      meanwhile the Alexandrian Text was not used as a base-text for any
      translation being made anywhere else. Plus, we don't see the
      Alexandrian Text being used much outside Egypt in the second
      century.

      So I think it is safe to say that the Proto-Alexandrian Text was, at
      the very least, /a/ local text of Egypt. We have to call the text-
      types something. If one uses the term "Byzantine" then it seems
      inconsistent to object to the terms "Proto-Alexandrian" and
      "Alexandrian."

      MR3: "The idea of the necessity of Abschriften/archtypes via
      recension(s) ... (this far and no further yet) to reach back to the
      Autographs is a non sequitur."

      Huh? My point about archetype-vs-autograph was in respect to your
      statement that the text of the autographs is in extant manuscripts.
      I was just pointing out that that's something taken on faith;
      scientifically, limiting our resources to the contents of extant
      witnesses, we can only reconstruct an archetype; the reception of
      that archetype as the text of the autograph is not a given.

      Yours in Christ,

      Jim Snapp II
      Curtisville Christian Church
      Indiana (USA)
      www.curtisvillechristian.org
    • K. Martin Heide
      Wieland Willker wrote: Defending the Western Non-Interpolations : The Case for an Anti Separationist Tendenz in the Longer Alexandrian Readings by Michael
      Message 2 of 27 , Sep 8, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Wieland Willker wrote:
        "Defending the 'Western Non-Interpolations': The Case for an Anti Separationist Tendenz in the Longer Alexandrian Readings"
        by Michael W. Martin
        JBL 124/2 (2005) 269–294
        
        I haven't really digested it yet, just skimmed through it, but already found this gem:
        "the chance or probability of exactly seven mistaken verdicts of authenticity occurring with regard to the eight Lukan verses is 0.003574092055824." (sic! 15 digits). 
        Not discussing the faulty premises, would it not be enough to say it is less than 1%? Is this a peer reviewed journal? Alas, Bob Waltz is not here anymore. 
        
        Ok, so much for a bad start, I will nevertheless read it carefully, just skipping the "mathematical" part. 
        Btw. are theologians forced to use German words in their scholarly articles? To me this looks just silly. 
        
          
        Meanwhile, I had the chance to read the article.

        What I do not understand is that M.W. Martin does not cite the final article of K. Aland, "Die Bedeutung des P75 für den Text des Neuen Testaments: Ein Beitrag zur Frage der "Western non-interpolations"" in: "Studien zur Überlieferung des Neuen Testaments und seines Textes", ANTF 2 (only  the early form of Aland's article in NTS 12; see Martin's footnote 2), and even worse, does not deal with Aland's observations.

        Aland compares the WNI (western non-interpolations), which are admittingly "orthodox" in their theology, with different omissions of the "western" texts, which are (from his viewpoint) neither orthodox nor heterodox in their theology: Lk 5:39; 10:41; 12:19: 12:21; 12:39; 22:19-20; 22:43-44; 22:62; 24:3; John 3:31-2; 4:9, and which point to a "western" tendency to omit at certain points .

        Now, from all these only one scripture is treated by M.W. Martin in detail (Lk 22:19-20), the others not. Why? Did I mistake s.th.?
        Neither did Ehrman deal with K.Aland's observations in his "Orthodox Corruption".

        I agree with Wieland pertaining to statistics and numbers. The German chancellor Konrad Adenauer said, "believe only in the statistics you faked yourself"! :-)

        Best wishes,  Martin
      • Peter Head
        Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26. Cheers Peter ... Peter M. Head, PhD Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
        Message 3 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26.

          Cheers

          Peter

          >
          >----------

          Peter M. Head, PhD
          Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
          Tyndale House
          36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
          566607
          Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
          http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm
        • Jim West
          It isn t bold in Merk s edition- but it is in all the copies of NA I have here. Maybe just extra ink flowed at that spot? I don t think there s any textual
          Message 4 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            It isn't bold in Merk's edition- but it is in all the copies of NA I
            have here. Maybe just extra ink flowed at that spot? I don't think
            there's any textual reason for it. I take it to be a printer's error.

            Best

            Jim



            Peter Head wrote:
            > Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26.
            >
            > Cheers
            >
            > Peter

            --
            Jim West

            Biblical Studies Resources - http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
            Biblical Theology Weblog - http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com
          • Peter Williams
            NA27 is generally a photographic reproduction of NA26, except in the apparatus. See the phrase avoiding the necessity for altering the page makeup on p. 46*
            Message 5 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              NA27 is generally a photographic reproduction of NA26, except in the
              apparatus. See the phrase 'avoiding the necessity for altering the page
              makeup' on p. 46* of NA27. I've wondered before whether this letter was
              indeed bold, but I reckon that many graphical features are shared between
              the editions.

              Consider for instance p. 59 line 3 where at Matthew 21:14 there is a tiny
              dot just after XWLOI. This is shared in an edition of NA26 and of NA27 in
              my possession.

              NA27 is thus _literally_ a photographic reproduction of NA26, though within
              these editions there are corrected printings.

              Can anyone find any more dots?

              Pete



              At 11:35 12/09/2005 +0100, you wrote:
              >Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26.
              >
              >Cheers
              >
              >Peter
              >
              > >
              > >----------
              >
              >Peter M. Head, PhD
              >Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
              >Tyndale House
              >36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
              >566607
              >Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
              ><http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm>http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >----------
              >YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
              >
              > * Visit your group
              > "<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism>textualcriticism" on the web.
              > *
              > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > *
              > <mailto:textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > *
              > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
              > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              >
              >
              >----------


              ------------
              Peter Williams
              Deputy Head of Divinity, History and Philosophy
              University of Aberdeen
              p.j.williams@...
            • Stephen C. Carlson
              ... Typographical error, perhaps? If so, this would illuminate what is stated on p. 46* that the TEXT of this edition reproduces that of the 26th edition
              Message 6 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                At 11:35 AM 9/12/2005 +0100, Peter Head wrote:
                >Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26.

                Typographical error, perhaps? If so, this would illuminate what is stated on
                p. 46* that the "TEXT of this edition reproduces that of the 26th edition
                unchanged. Consequently, with rare exceptions, the paragraphing and punctuation
                remains the same, avoiding the necessity for altering the page makeup."

                This indicates to me that the page containing Mark 13:13 in the 26th edition
                may not have been re-typeset for the 27th edition.

                Stephen

                --
                Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@...
                Weblog: http://www.hypotyposeis.org/weblog/
                Author of: The Gospel Hoax, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1932792481
              • Peter Head
                There is some kind of a dot on the same page as ESESQE under the HENEKEN of 13.9 (shared in NA26 and NA 27). Fair enough the whole page is a straightforward
                Message 7 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  There is some kind of a dot on the same page as ESESQE under the HENEKEN of
                  13.9 (shared in NA26 and NA 27). Fair enough the whole page is a
                  straightforward reproduction. So a single bold letter is just an unusual
                  typo or a type-setter making his mark, or is it supposed to signal
                  something like bold letters in the Hebrew Bible?

                  Pete

                  At 01:00 PM 9/12/05, you wrote:
                  >NA27 is generally a photographic reproduction of NA26, except in the
                  >apparatus. See the phrase 'avoiding the necessity for altering the page
                  >makeup' on p. 46* of NA27. I've wondered before whether this letter was
                  >indeed bold, but I reckon that many graphical features are shared between
                  >the editions.
                  >
                  >Consider for instance p. 59 line 3 where at Matthew 21:14 there is a tiny
                  >dot just after XWLOI. This is shared in an edition of NA26 and of NA27 in
                  >my possession.
                  >
                  >NA27 is thus _literally_ a photographic reproduction of NA26, though within
                  >these editions there are corrected printings.
                  >
                  >Can anyone find any more dots?
                  >
                  >Pete
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >At 11:35 12/09/2005 +0100, you wrote:
                  > >Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26.
                  > >
                  > >Cheers
                  > >
                  > >Peter
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > >----------
                  > >
                  > >Peter M. Head, PhD
                  > >Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
                  > >Tyndale House
                  > >36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
                  > >566607
                  > >Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223
                  > 566608
                  > ><http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm>http://www.tyn
                  > dale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >----------
                  > >YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                  > >
                  > > * Visit your group
                  > > "<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism>textualcriticism" on
                  > the web.
                  > > *
                  > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  > > *
                  > >
                  > <mailto:textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  > >
                  > > *
                  > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
                  > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >----------
                  >
                  >
                  >------------
                  >Peter Williams
                  >Deputy Head of Divinity, History and Philosophy
                  >University of Aberdeen
                  >p.j.williams@...
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  Peter M. Head, PhD
                  Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
                  Tyndale House
                  36 Selwyn Gardens Phone: (UK) 01223
                  566607
                  Cambridge, CB3 9BA Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
                  http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/Staff.htm
                • Daniel B. Wallace
                  It s not bold in my eighth printing of NA27. Dan Wallace ... From: Jim West To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re:
                  Message 8 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    It's not bold in my eighth printing of NA27.

                    Dan Wallace

                    ----- Start Original Message -----
                    From: Jim West <jwest@...>
                    To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Mark 13.13 ESESQE

                    > It isn't bold in Merk's edition- but it is in all the copies of NA I
                    > have here. Maybe just extra ink flowed at that spot? I don't think
                    > there's any textual reason for it. I take it to be a printer's error.
                    >
                    > Best
                    >
                    > Jim
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Peter Head wrote:
                    > > Does anyone know why the middle epsilon is printed bold in NA27 and NA26.
                    > >
                    > > Cheers
                    > >
                    > > Peter
                    >
                    > --
                    > Jim West
                    >
                    > Biblical Studies Resources - http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
                    > Biblical Theology Weblog - http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >

                    ----- End Original Message -----
                  • Viktor Golinets
                    In my copy of NA27, 8th Printing, 2001 (in German 27. Auflage, 2. Druck) , the middle epsilon is not printed bold. But it is bold in NA27, 2nd printing, 1994.
                    Message 9 of 27 , Sep 12, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In my copy of NA27, 8th Printing, 2001 (in German "27. Auflage, 2. Druck) , the middle epsilon is not printed bold. But it is bold in NA27, 2nd printing, 1994.
                       
                      In NA27, 2nd printing, 1994 in Acts 1:1 LOGON the last letter is bold. But in NA27, 8th printing, 2001 it is not bold.
                       
                      Here is the short list of other instances in NA27, 2nd printing, 1994 and in NA27, 8th printing, 2001 with bold letters:
                       

                      Lk 1,59 PERITEMEIN the first Iota

                      Lk 2,31 PROSWPON the first Omicron and the accent sign

                      John 3,28 MARTUREITE the first four letters

                      John 10:23 PERIPATEI the second Iota

                      John 10:25 hA and the accent sign

                      John 11:31 MET THE first letter

                      Acts 1:1 W and the accent sign

                      Hebr 9,25 EAUTON the Ypsilon

                      These are the instances that I have just noted during my reading but I have not checked all the NT consequently. I also have not checked the 1st, the 3rd, the 5th, the 6th and the 7th printigs of NA27.


                      Viktor Golinets, M.A.
                      Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München
                      Institut für Semitistik


                      Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB kostenlosem Speicher
                    • Viktor Golinets
                      I have just forgotten to share my opinion: I consider this bold printing of letters to be just typographical irregularities. Viktor Golinets Viktor Golinets
                      Message 10 of 27 , Sep 13, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I have just forgotten to share my opinion: I consider this bold printing of letters to be just typographical irregularities.
                         
                        Viktor Golinets


                        Viktor Golinets <viktor_golinets@...> schrieb:
                        In my copy of NA27, 8th Printing, 2001 (in German "27. Auflage, 2. Druck") , the middle epsilon is not printed bold. But it is bold in NA27, 2nd printing, 1994.
                         
                        In NA27, 2nd printing, 1994 in Acts 1:1 LOGON the last letter is bold. But in NA27, 8th printing, 2001 it is not bold.
                         
                        Here is the short list of other instances in NA27, 2nd printing, 1994 and in NA27, 8th printing, 2001 with bold letters:
                         

                        Lk 1,59 PERITEMEIN the first Iota

                        Lk 2,31 PROSWPON the first Omicron and the accent sign

                        John 3,28 MARTUREITE the first four letters

                        John 10:23 PERIPATEI the second Iota

                        John 10:25 hA and the accent sign

                        John 11:31 MET THE first letter

                        Acts 1:1 W and the accent sign

                        Hebr 9,25 EAUTON the Ypsilon

                        These are the instances that I have just noted during my reading but I have not checked all the NT consequently. I also have not checked the 1st, the 3rd, the 5th, the 6th and the 7th printigs of NA27.


                        Viktor Golinets, M.A.
                        Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München
                        Institut für Semitistik


                        Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB kostenlosem Speicher


                        Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB kostenlosem Speicher
                      • voxverax
                        Dear Peter: I m pretty sure the bold epsilon is a typo, possibly elicited by a typesetter s omission of es and a subsequent correction at the proof-reading
                        Message 11 of 27 , Sep 15, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Peter:

                          I'm pretty sure the bold epsilon is a typo, possibly elicited by a
                          typesetter's omission of "es" and a subsequent correction at the
                          proof-reading stage.

                          In the 1963 25th edition, "esesqe" is normal, without any bold
                          letters.

                          Yours in Christ,

                          James E. Snapp, Jr.
                          Curtisville Christian Church
                          Curtisville, OH (USA)
                          www.curtisvillechristian.org
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.