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

Re: [textualcriticism] Nomen Sacrum for Pneuma

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
      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 2 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
        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 3 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007
          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 4 of 5 , Feb 15, 2007

                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.