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

Re: [textualcriticism] Acts 16:7 - The Spirit {Of Jesus}

Expand Messages
  • George F Somsel
    I would hardly think that Gill was here making a text critical decision -- especially since it was really prior to the time that textual criticism became
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 22, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I would hardly think that Gill was here making a text critical decision -- especially since it was really prior to the time that textual criticism became prominent.  It is rather a homiletical comment somewhat akin to Matthew Henry's comment on the creation of woman from Adam's rib  (which I now understand derives from Jewish sources).

      That the woman was made of a rib out of the side of Adam; not made out of his head to rule over him, nor out of his feet to be trampled upon by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, under his arm to be protected, and near his heart to be beloved.

      Henry, M. (1996, c1991). Matthew Henry's commentary on the whole Bible : Complete and unabridged in one volume (Ge 2:21). Peabody: Hendrickson.

      It would be a mistake to mix textual criticism  with homily.

      george
      gfsomsel
       
      … search for truth, hear truth,
      learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
      defend the truth till death.
       
      - Jan Hus
      _________


      ----- Original Message ----
      From: Schmuel <schmuel@...>
      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 12:12:05 PM
      Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Acts 16:7 - The Spirit {Of Jesus}

      Hi Folks,

      This is a verse where your understanding will be connected with your
      views of lectio difficilior and your overall view of Aleph and B versus
      the majority Greek Byzantine text.   There were two excellent answers
      given to Bryan but I just want to add a bit more.

      This is a continuation from September :-) .

      Acts 16:7 (KJB)
      After they were come to Mysia,
      they assayed to go into Bithynia:
      but the Spirit suffered them not.

      Acts 16:7 (NASV)
      and after they came to Mysia,
      they were trying to go into Bithynia,
      and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them;

      Bryan Cox -

      Metzger ... states  that the phrase, "the spirit of Jesus", was "so unusual that various attempts were made to modify it".  Thus, some manuscripts have "the spirit of the Lord" or "the holy spirit".

      First I would like to note John Gill.

      John Gill
      http://eword. gospelcom. net/comments/ acts/gill/ acts16.htm
      the Alexandrian copy, and Beza's most ancient copy, and some others, and the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions read, "the Spirit of Jesus": so that it was not an evil spirit, or Satan, that hindered them, who sometimes did; but they were under the direction and guidance of the divine Spirit, called, in the preceding verse, the Holy Ghost;

      I give John Gill to show that textual theories can go both ways.  Gill is not seeing
      "Spirit of Jesus" as harder to be smoothed, but more as an expounding for a
      conjectured spiritual 'safety net'.  Apparently John Gill is not taking a textual stance,
      the expounding could be either Luke or later copyists.

      And note that Jim Snapp in giving his nine reasons, the last four overlap this idea,
      http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/textualcri ticism/message/ 3377

      Although Reid Lindner, in his also excellent and related four reasons, let that idea go by.
      http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/textualcri ticism/message/ 3376

      Both are thanked for truly excellent posts.

      Bryan Cox
      ...I am curious if anyone knows of and could share, from a Byzantine/Majority text "supporter" perspective, any currently existing theories on this particular variant and how it might have resulted in the other readings.

      Note that this part was covered in the posts above. However more can be shared.

      A good place to start, as often is the case, is in the Dean's office.

      He is less interested in 'how' one reading goes to another (personally I find those
      theories are often tailored to agenda and convenience, with either side takeable
      depending on what is to be demonstrated) but how the longer reading first arose
      -- as part of a pattern of corruptions.

      http://books. google.com/ books?id= fX9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA288
      The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Vindicated & Established (p. 288) - Dean John Burgon
       
      Burgon calls this WH addition part of the "skeptical character of B and Aleph"

      Mentioning Matthew 3:16 and other verses as similar corruptions.  Keep in mind
      that sometimes the B and Aleph readings do not make the modern version texts.
      Also this is only one section amidst a fascinating part of the book, with similar
      sections.

      You would have to do a bit of research on each one to determine your own view
      of the analogous situations.   However for reference I will give you the KJB/TR
      verses, and the Dean note.  The Greek is in the page above. 

      (omission is in itself skeptical)

      Matthew 3:16
      And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water:
      and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God
      descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

      (Matthew 1:18 - slurring the divine birth in Aleph and B)

      Matthew 1:18
      Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:
      When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,
      before they came together,
      she was found with child of the Holy Ghost

      (necessity of the Lord to suffer),

      Luke 24:46
      And said unto them,
      Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer,
      and to rise from the dead the third day:

      Matthew 19:16-17 - Omission of the title 'good' applied to our Lord

      Matthew 19:17
      And, behold, one came and said unto him,
      Good Master, what good thing shall I do,
      that I may have eternal life?

      And he said unto him,
      Why callest thou me good?
      there is none good but one, that is, God:
      but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

      And the omission of the ending of Mark as being of a similar nature.

      ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= =======

      There is one other element I would like to share.

      Dr. George Milligan in defending the Revision's longer reading says:

      Expository Value Of The Revised Version - p.99 (1917)
      "Acts 16:7... the striking reading, 'the Spirit of Jesus' (not simply as in the Authorized Version 'the Spirit') implies that the Holy Spirit had so taken possession of the Person of the Exalted Jesus that He could be spoken of as 'the Spirit of Jesus.'"

      Benjamin Wilkinson, pro-TR comments.

      http://kjv.benabrah am.com/html/ chapter-11. html
      The evident purpose of this change is to open the way to teach ideas of
      the Person of Jesus different from the generally accepted Protestant view.

      Benjamin couches this in the context of Trinitarian orthodoxy, however he
      does not discuss the distinction he would have to make with:

      Romans 8:9
      But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit,
      if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
      Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ,
      he is none of his.

      Philippians  1:19 -
      For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer,
      and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

      1Peter 1:11
      Searching what,
      or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify,
      when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ,
      and the glory that should follow.


      So for now I would put limited capital into the Wilkinson explanation,
      while allowing for a more complete exposition.

      ============ ========= ========= ==

      EARLY CHURCH WRITERS

      I think it would be an interesting endeavor to find most of the early church writer references.
      A lot of times the references tell you much more than the citations.  And I think sometimes
      the apparatus "double-dips" Jerome, by giving him the Vulgate reading, rather than his own
      specific writing.  Granted, this was likely an early text-line split.  From Münster :

      WH
      Origenlat Didymusdub Jerome Cyril

      TR
      Ephraem Epiphanius Chrysostom  (Ambrosiaster)

      Shalom,
      Steven Avery
      Queens, NY





      Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.