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

Re: Comments on Wachtel: "Kinds of variants ..."

Expand Messages
  • Wieland Willker
    ... What I mean is that Wachtel seems to think that the Byz text developed without thoughtful recensions. His argument is that Byz variants also appear in
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 10, 2005
      K. Martin Heide wrote:
      > Additionally, Codex W has the majority text only in
      > part, Wachtel's stages-theory does not exclude
      > larger steps which might be processed by scribes
      > during the first decades of the 4th century etc.


      What I mean is that Wachtel seems to think that the Byz text developed
      without thoughtful recensions. His argument is that Byz variants also
      appear in other texttpes. But there the appearance is much more
      sporadic. I doubt that such accidental or casual variation can lead
      within one century to the full-fledged form represented e.g. in W (Mt,
      Mk 8-16).
      I am not sure but still think it more likely that SOME FORM OF RECENSION
      more likely explains the evidence in the Gospels. What exactly this
      recension was I am not sure, but for a Darvinistic development is not
      enough time IMHO.
      Of course one question is where to draw the line between thoughtful
      recension and accidental variation. Perhaps we will meet somewhere in
      the middle.

      Best wishes
      Wieland
      <><
      ------------------------------------------------
      Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
      mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
      Textcritical commentary:
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
    • K. Martin Heide
      Wieland Willker wrote: ... What I mean is that Wachtel seems to think that the Byz text developed without thoughtful recensions. His argument is that Byz
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 10, 2005
        Wieland Willker wrote:
        K. Martin Heide wrote:
         > Additionally, Codex W has the majority text only in
         > part, Wachtel's stages-theory does not exclude
         > larger steps which might be processed by scribes
         > during the first decades of the 4th century etc.
        
        
        What I mean is that Wachtel seems to think that the Byz text developed
        without thoughtful recensions. His argument is that Byz variants also
        appear in other texttpes. But there the appearance is much more
        sporadic. I doubt that such accidental or casual variation can lead
        within one century to the full-fledged form represented e.g. in W (Mt,
        Mk 8-16).
        I am not sure but still think it more likely that SOME FORM OF RECENSION
        more likely explains the evidence in the Gospels. What exactly this
        recension was I am not sure, but for a Darvinistic development is not
        enough time IMHO.
        Of course one question is where to draw the line between thoughtful
        recension and accidental variation. Perhaps we will meet somewhere in
        the middle.
        
        Best wishes
            Wieland
               <><
          
        I agree in part. I don't think there was a "not thoughtful, Darwinistic" development. It was thoughtful.
        Very interesting in this regard is what Tov says about the devlopments of variants at Qumran, that
        literary compositions in the biblical environment (commentaries, Targumim, apocrypha, citations) served as a ressource
        for acceptable variants.

        During / after the changes allowed by Constantine,
        new bibles were ordered and copied by thousands (cf. the letter of Const. to Eusebius), and a more smooth and readable,
        user-friendly bible was produced for the spread of Christianity. Known variants which helped to understand the bible
        (early church-father citations, commentaries, parallels in the gospels...) seem to have been allowed to a certain extent,
        but controlled (not at random).


        (Tov, “The Nature & Background of Harmonizations in Biblical Manuscripts”, JSOT 31(1985), S.16ff)



        Best wishes, MH
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.