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

Nomen Sacrum for Pneuma

Expand Messages
  • Dirk Jongkind
    Whilst reading Ehrman s Whose Word is It (apparently published elsewhere as Misquoting Jesus ) I stumbled over an explanation of 1 Cor 12:13 (page 91). Here
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Whilst reading Ehrman's 'Whose Word is It' (apparently published
      elsewhere as 'Misquoting Jesus') I stumbled over an explanation of 1 Cor
      12:13 (page 91). Here the nomen sacrum of PNEUMA is used to explain the
      move from PNEUMA EPOTISQHSEN to POMA EPOTISQHSEN. This is the argument:

      'The word Spirit (PNEUMA) would have been abbreviated in most
      manuscripts as PMA [with overstroke; DJ], which understandably could be
      - and was - misread by some scribes as the Greek word for "drink" (POMA)
      ...'

      I certainly agree that it is a short step from PMA to POMA, but I cannot
      recollect having seen the nomen sacrum PMA, only PNA (which,
      incidentally, would lessen the optical similarity between PNA and POMA).
      I would be most grateful if somebody could help me with some examples of
      PMA instead of PNA. Any suggestions?


      Regards,
      Dirk


      --
      Dirk Jongkind, PhD
      Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
      John W. Laing Fellow, Tyndale House
      Tyndale House
      36 Selwyn Gardens
      Cambridge, CB3 9BA Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
      United Kingdom Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
    • Peter M. Head
      There are no examples of PMA listed in O Callaghan (1970). Pete ... Peter M. Head, PhD Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament Tyndale House 36 Selwyn
      Message 2 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        There are no examples of PMA listed in O'Callaghan (1970).

        Pete

        At 15:47 15/02/2007, you wrote:
        >Whilst reading Ehrman's 'Whose Word is It' (apparently published
        >elsewhere as 'Misquoting Jesus') I stumbled over an explanation of 1 Cor
        >12:13 (page 91). Here the nomen sacrum of PNEUMA is used to explain the
        >move from PNEUMA EPOTISQHSEN to POMA EPOTISQHSEN. This is the argument:
        >
        >'The word Spirit (PNEUMA) would have been abbreviated in most
        >manuscripts as PMA [with overstroke; DJ], which understandably could be
        >- and was - misread by some scribes as the Greek word for "drink" (POMA)
        >...'
        >
        >I certainly agree that it is a short step from PMA to POMA, but I cannot
        >recollect having seen the nomen sacrum PMA, only PNA (which,
        >incidentally, would lessen the optical similarity between PNA and POMA).
        >I would be most grateful if somebody could help me with some examples of
        >PMA instead of PNA. Any suggestions?
        >
        >
        >Regards,
        >Dirk
        >
        >
        >--
        >Dirk Jongkind, PhD
        >Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
        >John W. Laing Fellow, Tyndale House
        >Tyndale House
        >36 Selwyn Gardens
        >Cambridge, CB3 9BA Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
        >United Kingdom Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >

        Peter M. Head, PhD
        Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
        Tyndale House
        36 Selwyn Gardens
        Cambridge CB3 9BA
        01223 566601
      • klohaj@csl.edu
        Dirk, I discussed 1 Cor. 12:13 in my thesis and noted the same difficulty with the letter confusion argument. The argument is also found in Metzger s Text of
        Message 3 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          RE: [textualcriticism] Nomen Sacrum for Pneuma

          Dirk,

          I discussed 1 Cor. 12:13 in my thesis and noted the same difficulty with the "letter confusion argument." The argument is also found in Metzger's Text of the New Testament (third ed., p. 187 and fourth ed., p. 252). Paap does not list any examples, and Traube (pp. 93-95) finds only the Greek portion of a Coptic ms. using PMA and D-abschrift writing PMI where Codex Bezae writes PNI.

          The confusion can easily arise in minuscule script, where the mu and the nu can be very similar. I found several examples of pna in 1241 and 1243 (the last reads poma at 12:13) that look very much like pma. Furthermore, 056 and 0142 are the only two uncials with the reading but have virtually an identical text. These are late in date (10th cen.) and the lemmata are written in a script that is almost a blend of majuscule and minuscule. Very frequently minuscule combinations intrude (the commentary texts are written in minuscule). It is not impossible that these are copied from a minuscule exemplar.

          The alteration must have existed by the seventh century, however, as it is found in the Harklean Syriac. Rather than simple confusion of letters, it is more likely an adaptation to the near context, influenced by the verb epotisqhmen, and possibly also also recalling 1 Cor. 10:4: poma pneumatikon epion. Theological motivations are unlikely. Before the tenth century, only John of Damascus discusses this passage in a Eucharistic context (though he cites 12:13a, skips over this portion of the passage, then continues with 12:14;MPG 95, 669). Theophylact (11th cen) does make a clear Eucharistic reference, however (MPG 124, 716).

          Clement is cited in the NA27 apparatus for poma (Paedagogus 1,6,31,1), but this reference is a candidate for deletion. Tischendorf cited his text as eni pomati epiomen, but this is drawn from the edition of Heinsius and Sylburgius as cited in Griesbach's Symbolae Criticae, and no ms. of Clement actually reads this. The editions of  Stählin and Treu as well as Marrou and Harl print en poma epotisqhmen, but this is based on a 12th cen. minuscule that actually reads en poma ekotis] (and then breaks off). The most recent edition, by Marcovich, prints en pneuma epotisqhmen, and this is undoubtedly correct given the comments that Clement makes immediately afterward.

          Good to see the word "whilst", BTW.

          Jeff Kloha
          Concordia Seminary
          St. Louis, MO USA


          -----Original Message-----
          From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com on behalf of Dirk Jongkind
          Sent: Thu 2/15/2007 9:47 AM
          To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [textualcriticism] Nomen Sacrum for Pneuma

          Whilst reading Ehrman's 'Whose Word is It' (apparently published
          elsewhere as 'Misquoting Jesus') I stumbled over an explanation of 1 Cor
          12:13 (page 91). Here the nomen sacrum of PNEUMA is used to explain the
          move from PNEUMA EPOTISQHSEN to POMA EPOTISQHSEN. This is the argument:

          'The word Spirit (PNEUMA) would have been abbreviated in most
          manuscripts as PMA [with overstroke; DJ], which understandably could be
          - and was - misread by some scribes as the Greek word for "drink" (POMA)
          ...'

          I certainly agree that it is a short step from PMA to POMA, but I cannot
          recollect having seen the nomen sacrum PMA, only PNA (which,
          incidentally, would lessen the optical similarity between PNA and POMA).
          I would be most grateful if somebody could help me with some examples of
          PMA instead of PNA. Any suggestions?


          Regards,
          Dirk


          --
          Dirk Jongkind, PhD
          Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
          John W. Laing Fellow, Tyndale House
          Tyndale House
          36 Selwyn Gardens
          Cambridge, CB3 9BA              Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
          United Kingdom                  Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608





          Yahoo! Groups Links

          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/

          <*> Your email settings:
              Individual Email | Traditional

          <*> To change settings online go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/join
              (Yahoo! ID required)

          <*> To change settings via email:
              mailto:textualcriticism-digest@yahoogroups.com
              mailto:textualcriticism-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


        • Williams, Dr Peter J.
          Dirk Jongkind wrote: Whilst reading Ehrman s Whose Word is It ... Maurice Robinson is informative in the 5th comment on:
          Message 4 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Dirk Jongkind wrote: 'Whilst reading Ehrman's 'Whose Word is It'...'

            Maurice Robinson is informative in the 5th comment on: http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2005/12/review-of-bart-ehrman-misquoting-jesus_31.html

            I quote:

            'Ehrman's claim that the nomen sacrum for ?????? was ??? would not be as problematic had not Ehrman made *exactly* the same error in his revision of Metzger's Text of the New Testament! I can only conclude that Ehrman's intention in claiming ??? must be deliberate.

            As noted, Ehrman's claim regarding 1Cor 12:13 depends upon this false identification. In fact, the few minuscules that read POMA (630 1510 1881 al) more likely simply confused the *minuscule* continuous text form of ??? with the word ?o?? (compare any minuscule MS to see the point).'

            Recent Activity

            *
            5
            New Members <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJnaTlnbDFtBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyNTQ0MzA5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjExMzkyNgRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2bWJycwRzdGltZQMxMTcxNTU1Nzky>

            Visit Your Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMWFocmp2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyNTQ0MzA5BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNjExMzkyNgRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzExNzE1NTU3OTI->
            Yahoo! News

            Science News <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12iqh36n5/M=493064.9803190.10510181.8674578/D=groups/S=1706113926:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1171562992/A=3848611/R=0/SIG=12t54fmfj/*http://news.yahoo.com/i/753;_ylt=A9FJqYYsvq5E.kwAkwOyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA2NWJlcmlsBHNlYwN0bg-->

            Get the latest

            scientific news.

            Yahoo! TV

            Staying in tonight? <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12iaupka5/M=493064.9803235.10510228.8674578/D=groups/S=1706113926:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1171562992/A=3848445/R=0/SIG=10t28jksf/*http://tv.yahoo.com/lineup/>

            Check listings to

            see what is on.

            New web site?

            Drive traffic now. <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12il4er6h/M=493064.9803227.10510220.8674578/D=groups/S=1706113926:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1171562992/A=3848642/R=0/SIG=131eshi2t/*http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/srchv2.php?o=US2004&cmp=Yahoo&ctv=Groups3&s=Y&s2=&s3=&b=50>

            Get your business

            on Yahoo! search.

            .
          • Bart Ehrman
            Sorry all. It s a typo. Or rather, a scribal corruption. -- B Bart D. Ehrman James A. Gray Professor Department of Religious Studies University of North
            Message 5 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
            • 0 Attachment

                  Sorry all.  It’s a typo.  Or rather, a scribal corruption.

              -- B

               

              Bart D. Ehrman

              James A. Gray Professor

              Department  of Religious Studies

              University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

               

               


              From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com [mailto: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Peter M. Head
              Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 12:08 PM
              To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Nomen Sacrum for Pneuma

               

              There are no examples of PMA listed in O'Callaghan (1970).

              Pete

              At 15:47 15/02/2007, you wrote:

              >Whilst reading Ehrman's 'Whose Word is It' (apparently published
              >elsewhere as 'Misquoting Jesus') I stumbled over an explanation of 1 Cor
              >12:13 (page 91). Here the nomen sacrum of PNEUMA is used to explain the
              >move from PNEUMA EPOTISQHSEN to POMA EPOTISQHSEN. This is the argument:
              >
              >'The word Spirit (PNEUMA) would have been abbreviated in most
              >manuscripts as PMA [with overstroke; DJ], which understandably could be
              >- and was - misread by some scribes as the Greek word for "drink"
              (POMA)
              >...'
              >
              >I certainly agree that it is a short step from PMA to POMA, but I cannot
              >recollect having seen the nomen sacrum PMA, only PNA (which,
              >incidentally, would lessen the optical similarity between PNA and POMA).
              >I would be most grateful if somebody could help me with some examples of
              >PMA instead of PNA. Any suggestions?
              >
              >
              >Regards,
              >Dirk
              >
              >
              >--
              >Dirk Jongkind, PhD
              >Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
              >John W. Laing Fellow, Tyndale House
              >Tyndale House
              >36 Selwyn
              w:st="on">Gardens
              > Cambridge , CB3 9BA
              Phone:( UK ) 01223 566603
              > United Kingdom Fax: (
              w:st="on"> UK ) 01223 566608
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >

              Peter M. Head, PhD
              Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
              Tyndale House
              36 Selwyn Gardens
              Cambridge CB3 9BA
              01223 566601

            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.