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

RE: [textualcriticism] Hebrew version

Expand Messages
  • Kevin P. Edgecomb
    Jim West wrote: Tendentiousness can only be asserted where we have firm evidence that Paul had a particular version of the LXX. If we don t know what he s
    Message 1 of 22 , Mar 22, 2007
      Jim West wrote:

      Tendentiousness can only be asserted where we have firm evidence that Paul
      had a particular version of the LXX. If we don't know what he's quoting,
      its a bit presumptuous to call his quote tendentious.

      I write:
      That's an interesting point, Jim, but similarly inconclusive. Is it more
      likely that Paul was walking and sailing around the Mediterranean with
      chests-full or buckets-full of books from which he would pick and choose the
      precise version of a verse or phrase that was most germane to his argument?
      Or that he was altering a remembered verse here and there to make it fit his
      arguments better? I think the latter is far more likely, and so have others
      on Paul, though I'd have to dig to find them; it might have been in one of
      the Donfried volumes. "Tendentious" does have perhaps too negative a
      connotation. "Adaptive" would be more neutral.

      It's exactly related to the practice of patristic citations. See Carroll
      Osburn's "Methodology in Identifying Patristic Citations in NT Textual
      Criticism" (NovTest 47.4 (2005): 313-343. If you don't have it, let me
      know. I just read it this last week or so. It's great at setting out
      examples, and explaining just how really tricky it is to use patristic
      citations for NT textual criticism. The same, I would say, applies to
      establishing "the" OT text Paul was using based on Paul's citations.
      Anyhow, have a read.

      Regards,
      Kevin P. Edgecomb
      Berkeley, California
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.