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

Re: 1 Cor 15:51 - "not?"

Expand Messages
  • mydogregae01
    ... ____________________________________________ Here is some of the data to support the Greek reading having NOT referring to a changing. i.e. Jerome s
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 18, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      > billrossfamily <BillRoss@...> wrote: I
      came across this comment on a blog:
      > "But, John, we have Augustine and Jerome making the same sorts of
      > comments about the manuscripts available to them. (In fact, to show
      > these were not minor differences, Jerome had two readings of 1
      > Corinthians 15:51, one ending 'but we shall all be changed,' the
      > other 'but we shall NOT all be changed.' Unlike modern translations,
      > Jerome preferred the 'not' version.)"
      > Does anyone have a list of the variants on this passage? The "not"
      > really seems to make more sense of the passage to me.

      Here is some of the data to support the Greek reading having "NOT"
      referring to a changing. i.e. Jerome's preference:

      codex 01
      codex 02
      codex 04
      codex 06
      codex 010
      codex 012
      codex 0243
      MS 33
      MS 1241
      MS 1739

      The above show the readings in the original hands, some have changes
      via correctors.

      Papyrus P46, has "ou" in both places and is possibly a conflation.
      Codex 0243 has a comment on the side of the main text, which may have
      more information (I see a part on my hard copy, if you want me to view
      the full comment, I would have to get my film out, but would gladly do

      Contextually: The Byzantine MSS seem to be correct with the "not"
      before "sleep". As the passage is discussing a mysterious "rapture".
      Some of us will be alive when this occurs; thus some will not be
      "asleep". But "we all shall be changed" refers to all elect of this
      present age. None of the sleeping or living elect will miss this. Had
      Paul been addressing Israelites, or some other group, then Jerome
      would be safe, but Paul is the apostle to the NATIONS (plural), even
      of the elect out of all of the nations. Hence, IMHO I would reject
      Jerome's preference. I suspect a corruption stemming from Egypt, and
      affecting some Latin MSS.

      I have not yet examined the passage in all the early versions, which
      may add more light. However, the Latin d, f and g, support their
      interlined Greek texts. Yet 012 and g do not agree with f and d, as
      012 and g read "sleep" not "resurrect". 012 also has an "ouv" where
      P46 has an "ou", which is fine translation in g and probably has
      nothing to do with P46's "ou". Only the Greek 06 and MS 628 read
      "resurrect" for the proper "sleep".

      The Bohairic and Gothic support the Byzantine text.

      "f" reads:
      "Omnes quidem resurgemus sed NON omnes immutabimur" - per f* yet f
      corrects the "resurrected" to "dormiemus" (sleep) in the Greek portion
      of text. Codex 06 and d agree with this same error in f.

      It will be interesting to examine other Old Latin texts which may
      contain this passage. The basic Peshitta agrees with the great mass of
      Greek manuscripts here. Much more data exists from the Latin fathers
      as well as in the Greek scholia. But the basic typical Greek text
      seems secure, again IMHO.

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