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

How many Variants per category

Expand Messages
  • Eddie Mishoe
    I wonder if I could ask those out here to fill in THEIR numbers they believe to be roughly accurate in the chart below. I m looking for total number of
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 30 2:56 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      I wonder if I could ask those out here to fill in
      THEIR numbers they believe to be roughly accurate in
      the chart below.

      I'm looking for total number of variants in:

      1. The 5,500+/- Greek MSS
      2. The 15,000 to 25,000 Versional MSS
      3. Patristic citations (there are a million citations
      AND allusions; so I don't know how many there are of
      each)

      The TOTAL of the above (1,2, and 3) should equal the
      standard 300,000 to 400,000 variants.

      I'll start: (for me, untrained in TC, this is a sheer
      guess)

      1. 75,000
      2. 175,000
      3. 150,000
      ---------
      400,000

      If anyone has any sources that actually have tried to
      ascertain these numbers, please let me know
      where!!!!!!!!


      Eddie Mishoe
      Pastor


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Be a better friend, newshound, and
      know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
    • Gene Brooks
      According to the notes I have taken in Maurice Robinson s TC this semester, 92 to 93% of the text is agreed as autograph for everyone. Not one doctrine is
      Message 2 of 12 , Mar 31 12:01 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        According to the notes I have taken in Maurice Robinson's TC this
        semester,

        92 to 93% of the text is agreed as autograph for everyone.
        Not one doctrine is established or disestablished from the 6-7% in
        dispute.

        The TR-KJV differs 1836 times from the Byz. out of 138,000 words >
        1.5%. No major doctrine affected.

        NA27 differs ~6000 times from the Byz. and TR out of 138,000 words >
        6% difference. Therefore in the 94% agreement, we are 100% certain on
        the autograph.

        Since Dr. Robinson is part of this forum, I trust he will correct any
        mistakes I have made.


        --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Mishoe <edmishoe@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > I wonder if I could ask those out here to fill in
        > THEIR numbers they believe to be roughly accurate in
        > the chart below.
        >
        > I'm looking for total number of variants in:
        >
        > 1. The 5,500+/- Greek MSS
        > 2. The 15,000 to 25,000 Versional MSS
        > 3. Patristic citations (there are a million citations
        > AND allusions; so I don't know how many there are of
        > each)
        >
        > The TOTAL of the above (1,2, and 3) should equal the
        > standard 300,000 to 400,000 variants.
        >
        > I'll start: (for me, untrained in TC, this is a sheer
        > guess)
        >
        > 1. 75,000
        > 2. 175,000
        > 3. 150,000
        > ---------
        > 400,000
        >
        > If anyone has any sources that actually have tried to
        > ascertain these numbers, please let me know
        > where!!!!!!!!
        >
        >
        > Eddie Mishoe
        > Pastor
        >
        >
        >
        ______________________________________________________________________
        ______________
        > Be a better friend, newshound, and
        > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
        http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
        >
      • yennifmit
        Dear Eddie, I can point you to something that might help get a feel for the extent and nature of variations among NT MSS. For my PhD research, I transcribed
        Message 3 of 12 , Mar 31 9:49 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Eddie,

          I can point you to something that might help get a feel for the extent
          and nature of variations among NT MSS.

          For my PhD research, I transcribed the papyrus and uncial MSS of
          Hebrews letter by letter. There are about thirty MSS in all, with one
          minuscule thrown in for good measure. I then wrote collation programs
          to compare the transcriptions. An important issue was whether
          orthographic differences (e.g. spelling, punctuation) should be
          counted. To help the computer do that, I classified each variation
          among all thirty or so MSS. You can download the result from here:

          http://alpha.reltech.org/tfinney/PhD/data/Equivalents/Equivalents

          If you put this file into a spread sheet, you will end up with a
          number of columns. Reading left to right, the columns are:

          (1) Actual reading
          (2) Normalised reading
          (3) Category
          (4) Witness (P = papyrus, U = uncial, M = minuscule)
          (5) Location (chapter.verse)
          (6) translation (only for substantive variants)

          By "substantive", I mean differences which actually affect meaning.
          Many of these don't affect the meaning much, e.g. synonyms, a
          participle instead of an infinitive. Others are grammatically correct
          in the immediate context but nevertheless seem to be wrong. (E.g.
          ADELFHN at Heb 8.11.)

          Now some analysis.

          Hebrews has about 5000 words. This list has about 2100 rows, meaning
          that in a 5000 word stretch of the New Testament there are about 2100
          differences among about 30 MSS. So one would not be too wrong in
          saying "If a word can vary, it will vary among the MSS." That is, any
          word that is not extremely simple, like KAI, is likely to vary. (BTW,
          one of the MSS, P12 I think, does have a variation on KAI: KE. Can I
          hear an Egyptian scribe's accent?)

          Digging a bit deeper, about 300/2100 (one in seven) are substantive
          (i.e. column 3 category = "variant"). Thus, there are about 300 real
          textual variations among 5000 words when only 30 MSS are considered. I
          don't know how much this figure would increase if all extant MSS of
          Hebrews were included, but I don't think it would be a great deal.
          Substantive variations among minuscules that are not also found among
          papyri or uncials are not too common. FWIW, my guess is that you would
          be safe to say that including all MSS would not increase the 300 by
          more than a factor of two.

          So, let's say the figure is 500. That would mean that when all words
          of all MSS are examined, you get about 500 substantive variations per
          5000 words, assuming Hebrews is representative. That would mean about
          10,000 over the 100,000 or so words of the New Testament.

          Now to what I think is the most important question. "So what?" If I
          found the two most distant MSS (i.e. the two with the most unlike
          texts among all of the MSS of Hebrews) and gave them to a native
          speaker of KOINE who could read, would that person notice a difference
          in the message conveyed by the two? (This could be tested by a
          suitably designed psychological experiment, although native speakers
          of KOINE might be a bit hard to find.) My guess is that a typical
          reader might notice a few differences but would not regard them as
          significant.

          Best,

          Tim Finney

          --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Mishoe <edmishoe@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > I wonder if I could ask those out here to fill in
          > THEIR numbers they believe to be roughly accurate in
          > the chart below.
          >
        • Eddie Mishoe
          Dr. Finney: Thank you for your reply. The more data I can acquire the better. I think I found the origin of the 200,000 to 400,000. It may come from John Mills
          Message 4 of 12 , Apr 1, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Dr. Finney:

            Thank you for your reply. The more data I can acquire
            the better.

            I think I found the origin of the 200,000 to 400,000.
            It may come from John Mills in 1707 edition of the
            GNT. In his critical apparatus, he has some 30,000
            variants listed, but this includes versions and church
            fathers.

            I also read, but have yet to verify, that the total
            number of "words" in ALL Greek MSS, ALL
            versions/translations, and ALL church father
            quotations approaches 1 billion. Now, are the (worst
            case) 400,000 variants to be compared to 1 billion?

            Also, your numbers seem different than Dr. Daniel
            Wallace's numbers with regard to meaningful variants.
            If I understood you correct, you offer 10,000 such
            variants, whereas Dr. Wallace has 1,400 meaningful and
            viable variants. Of the 1,400, he contends that no
            cardinal doctrine is affected by these.

            Dr. Kruger notes that Dr. Ehrman mentions 400,000
            variants, but is only able to find a handful of
            "significant" variants that change our view of early
            Christianity. Several have responded to his claims of
            these passages, such as Christ being angry, or dying
            "apart from" God.

            Dr. Wallace also gives a pie chart in Reinventing
            Jesus, but it appears his pie chart is not intended to
            be to scale.

            Oh well, off to find more sources. It amazes me how
            many scholars quote the number 200,000 to 400,000
            without knowing its source or validity.

            Eddie Mishoe
            Pastor


            ____________________________________________________________________________________
            You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
            http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
          • yennifmit
            Dear Eddie, ... I don t know how many words there are in all of the witnesses of the New Testament. My figures show that in the ~ 30 papyrus and uncial MSS of
            Message 5 of 12 , Apr 1, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Eddie,

              --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Mishoe <edmishoe@...>
              wrote:

              > I also read, but have yet to verify, that the total
              > number of "words" in ALL Greek MSS, ALL
              > versions/translations, and ALL church father
              > quotations approaches 1 billion. Now, are the (worst
              > case) 400,000 variants to be compared to 1 billion?

              I don't know how many words there are in all of the witnesses of the
              New Testament. My figures show that in the ~ 30 papyrus and uncial MSS
              of Hebrews, there are ~ 300 substantive variations among ~ 5000 words.
              I don't know how this figure scales up as more categories of witnesses
              are added but my guess is not that much, maybe a factor of two. To get
              an answer we would need to collate more and more witnesses. We could
              get an estimate by looking at how the number of substantive variations
              increases with the number of witnesses. I imagine that the curve rises
              quickly at first then levels out.

              >
              > Also, your numbers seem different than Dr. Daniel
              > Wallace's numbers with regard to meaningful variants.
              > If I understood you correct, you offer 10,000 such
              > variants, whereas Dr. Wallace has 1,400 meaningful and
              > viable variants. Of the 1,400, he contends that no
              > cardinal doctrine is affected by these.

              Not all of those 300 have an equal effect on meaning. You could go
              through them and decide which ones you consider significant. I would
              be interested to know what number you arrive at. (This exercise might
              be considered too subjective, but I would still like to know how many
              of the 300 substantive variants others consider significant. You don't
              need Greek to do it as translations of the variants are included in
              the list.)

              Here is something to illustrate the potential difficulty of deciding
              whether a substantive variant (i.e one that actually results in a
              different word once scribal quirks have been smoothed out) is
              significant. Say I have these texts:

              The cat sat on teh mat.
              The kat sat on the mat.
              The manx sat upon the rug.

              Cat/manx, on/upon and mat/rug are all what I call substantive
              variants--the words are actually different. By contrast, cat/kat might
              be called a spelling variation and teh/the an error. Turning to the
              substantive variations, is the cat/manx difference significant? How
              about on/upon? How about mat/rug? I imagine the answer to all three is
              "it depends". The message conveyed by each text is pretty much the
              same: the cat sat on the mat. Whether you think the specific "manx"
              rather than general "cat" is important depends on all kinds of
              factors. Getting others to agree with your view is another matter. For
              a generally acceptable result you could select a random sample of
              people and ask each whether the difference is significant.

              >
              > Dr. Kruger notes that Dr. Ehrman mentions 400,000
              > variants, but is only able to find a handful of
              > "significant" variants that change our view of early
              > Christianity. Several have responded to his claims of
              > these passages, such as Christ being angry, or dying
              > "apart from" God.

              Based on the list, the proportion of substantive variations per word
              is about 300/5000. This is only based on the papyrus and uncial MSS
              (and one minuscule) of Hebrews, so is an underestimate. My guess is
              that the figure might double if all the minuscules were included. If
              it turns out to be 500/5000 variants/word for Hebrews, the figure for
              the whole New Testament would be more like 10,000 substantive variants
              among the Greek manuscript witnesses. How many of those are generally
              regarded as significant would be a lesser number but hard to define.

              BTW, the "apart from God" variant (Heb 2.9) is one of the few in
              Hebrews that strike me as significant. I don't think this variant is
              anything to do with Christ's cry of dereliction--"Why have you
              forsaken me." Instead, it seems to me that XWRIS (apart from) instead
              of XARITI (by the grace of) is a qualification of Christ's "tasting
              death on behalf of all". That is, Christ died on behalf of all, being
              careful to exclude God from "all" because God doesn't need anyone to
              make a sacrifice for Him because He hasn't sinned. Neither variant
              (Christ tasted death for all by the grace of God; Christ tasted death
              for all except God) is telling us anything we don't already know from
              the rest of the New Testament. It seems to me that redundancy in the
              New Testament (i.e. saying the same thing in more than one place and
              in more than one way) makes its message robust against corruption by
              scribes, even orthodox ones.

              Best,

              Tim Finney
            • mydogregae01
              ... +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mr. Dykes responds, Be careful that one clarifies how the variants are
              Message 6 of 12 , Apr 2, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com,
                +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

                Eddie Mishoe <edmishoe@...> wrote:

                > Thank you for your reply. The more data I can acquire
                > the better.


                > Oh well, off to find more sources. It amazes me how
                > many scholars quote the number 200,000 to 400,000
                > without knowing its source or validity.
                >
                > Eddie Mishoe
                > Pastor

                ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
                Mr. Dykes responds,

                Be careful that one clarifies how the variants are counted!! One
                variation might be the word "Lord" for "God". This should count as one
                variant.....but some folks count all the manuscripts which show this
                variant (perhaps all 65 or whatever number) thus they would show a
                number of 65 instead of one.

                As to your request...this may assist.

                In my work on Corinthians, I collate about 100 Greek MSS. (Fresh
                collations, not copied from previous editions!! Papyri and parchment,
                and all eras before 1450 A.D.).

                In my essay titled: "The Doctrine of Inerrancy and the Manuscript
                Variants", at its end, I give some actual data.

                The essay is on my website (www.Biblical-data.org), in the Textual
                Criticism page.

                Chapter one of I Cor. has 31 verses, I count 156 variants from the 100
                witnesses I use. (this does not include simple phonetic errors, nor
                simple itacism errors, or moveable nu et al). BASED upon this actual
                data, I then figure (estimate) a total of 2200 variants for all of the
                437 verses in I Cor. I further estimate a complete total of about
                3,000 variants if all known (circa 600 MSS) Greek manuscripts were
                collated which contain I Cor. chapter one..

                Rough, but it has some actual basis. Using 3,000 variants for I Cor.
                we can further estimate at total of about 54,000 variants for all of
                the 7,959 verses in the KJV. This averages about 6.8 variants per
                verse for the entire NT.

                Finally, in I Cor. I find that about 60-70 of the 2200 variants affect
                any sort of a doctrine (some major doctrines, some minor). If this is
                a valid estimate, then we ought to expect that 2.9 % of all Greek
                variants (not phonetic or simple mispleelings, [:-)]or moveable nu et

                al) of the 54,000 total to reflect a possible major variation. Using
                my estimates we would see 1,566 variants in the NT which affect
                various religious doctrines (Trinity, resurrection, baptism, laws, et
                cetera).

                At least I base this rough estimate on accurate collations of chapter
                one of I Cor.. When I finish Corinthians, I will have a slightly
                clearer picture.

                Consequently, God-fearing textual critics have a responsibility to
                assist when any of these major variants occur in our Bible studies.
                Kind of an awesome responsibility!! But what an opportuinty to
                illuminate truth and to spread Biblical teachings!!

                Sincerely,
                Mr. Gary S. Dykes
              • mjriii2003
                Eddie Mishoe, According to the sixth edition of Warfield s An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, 1899 (Preface, 1886), Warfield
                Message 7 of 12 , Apr 2, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Eddie Mishoe,

                  According to the sixth edition of Warfield's An Introduction to the
                  Textual Criticism of the New Testament, 1899 (Preface, 1886),
                  Warfield mentions over 200,000 variants among at that time over 2,000
                  known Greek MSS.

                  http://books.google.com/books?output=html&id=lSOSAZ3uN44C&jtp=21

                  Our present knowledge is based upon over 5,000 known Greek MSS. The
                  question of significant/insignificant variants is still negligible
                  whether one cites W-H, Metzger, Robinson, or Wallace.

                  Malcolm
                  ________________


                  --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, Eddie Mishoe <edmishoe@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > Dr. Finney:
                  >
                  > Thank you for your reply. The more data I can acquire
                  > the better.
                  >
                  > I think I found the origin of the 200,000 to 400,000.
                  > It may come from John Mills in 1707 edition of the
                  > GNT. In his critical apparatus, he has some 30,000
                  > variants listed, but this includes versions and church
                  > fathers.
                  >
                  > I also read, but have yet to verify, that the total
                  > number of "words" in ALL Greek MSS, ALL
                  > versions/translations, and ALL church father
                  > quotations approaches 1 billion. Now, are the (worst
                  > case) 400,000 variants to be compared to 1 billion?
                  >
                  > Also, your numbers seem different than Dr. Daniel
                  > Wallace's numbers with regard to meaningful variants.
                  > If I understood you correct, you offer 10,000 such
                  > variants, whereas Dr. Wallace has 1,400 meaningful and
                  > viable variants. Of the 1,400, he contends that no
                  > cardinal doctrine is affected by these.
                  >
                  > Dr. Kruger notes that Dr. Ehrman mentions 400,000
                  > variants, but is only able to find a handful of
                  > "significant" variants that change our view of early
                  > Christianity. Several have responded to his claims of
                  > these passages, such as Christ being angry, or dying
                  > "apart from" God.
                  >
                  > Dr. Wallace also gives a pie chart in Reinventing
                  > Jesus, but it appears his pie chart is not intended to
                  > be to scale.
                  >
                  > Oh well, off to find more sources. It amazes me how
                  > many scholars quote the number 200,000 to 400,000
                  > without knowing its source or validity.
                  >
                  > Eddie Mishoe
                  > Pastor
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  ______________________________________________________________________
                  ______________
                  > You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of
                  Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
                  > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
                  >
                • James Snapp, Jr.
                  Eddie, Recently at the TC-Alternate list I noted the following: How many variants exist among the Greek manuscripts of the books of the New Testament?
                  Message 8 of 12 , Apr 3, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Eddie,

                    Recently at the TC-Alternate list I noted the following:

                    How many variants exist among the Greek manuscripts of the books of
                    the New Testament? Estimates have ranged from 30,000 to 50,000 to
                    200,000 to 300,000 to 400,000.

                    Dr. Tommy Wasserman's book "The Epistle of Jude: Its Text and
                    Transmission" meticulously presents the extant Greek attestation of
                    Jude's text. Wasserman's reconstructed text of Jude consists of 461
                    words. Wasserman lists 1,271 textual variants (I think. Some of
                    these are "defective," which means that they cannot be reconstructed
                    with certainty.) If we work with the unproven premise that variants
                    were created at the same rate in other books that they were created
                    in Jude, then if we apply the ratio of 461-to-1,271 to the total
                    number of words in the NT (put at 137,490 by Morgenthaler, as cited
                    by Metzger on p. 1 of "Lexical Aids for Students of NT Greek"), then
                    the total number of variants = 379,067. Or to loosen up the math a
                    bit, we could estimate that the number of variants in a given book
                    will be 2.75 times the number of words in the book.

                    So, it initially looks like the total number of textual variants in
                    the Greek NT is in the neighborhood of 380,000. One thing that I'm
                    not sure about, though, is whether or not it's sensible to count the
                    *authentic* readings as variants. When most folks talk about
                    variants, they mean variations from the original text, even though
                    technically a contested genuine reading is also a variant. If we
                    subtract from 380,000 the *authentic* 137,490 words, with their
                    authentic spelling, in their authentic word-order, then the number of
                    inauthentic readings seems to drop to 242,510.

                    Now, that unproven premise that I mentioned is probably incorrect.
                    We should probably expect the rate of variants in the Gospels to be
                    much higher than in Jude, since the Gospels have many more witnesses.
                    So let's figure in, oh, another 75,000 variants. Depending on
                    whether or not the authentic variants are counted, the total number
                    of variants in the Greek witnesses to the NT text might be about
                    455,000 or (subtracting the authentic readings) 317,510.

                    (Btw, I don't mean to imply that I agree with Morgenthaler's word-
                    count; I just used it because it was handy for the calculation.)

                    Yours in Christ,

                    James Snapp, Jr.
                    Minister, Curtisville Christian Church
                    Tipton, Indiana
                    www.curtisvillechristian.org/BasicTC.html
                  • Daniel Buck
                    ... Not one doctrine is established or disestablished from the 6-7% in dispute.
                    Message 9 of 12 , Apr 3, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      "Gene Brooks" <gbrooks@...> wrote:

                      >>92 to 93% of the text is agreed as autograph for everyone.
                      Not one doctrine is established or disestablished from the 6-7% in
                      dispute.<<

                      A couple of considerations here.

                      1. Every time an ancient koine mss of any appreciable size is
                      unearthed, it adds to the number of listed variants; the older the
                      ms, it seems, the more unique it is. Eliminate all pre-5th century
                      mss, and that number of agreement climbs up to the high 90's,
                      approaching 99% by the eighth century.

                      2. How about the doctrine (teaching) of Jesus that certain kinds of
                      demons can only be expelled by prayer and fasting? From being
                      reiterated in the majority of mss, it is eliminated in the eclectic
                      text. This despite the fact that the corpus is divided, with mss of
                      all three textual families and four versions taking opposite sides on
                      the question. Even arm and geo exhibit a rare disagreement here.

                      Daniel
                    • Eddie Mishoe
                      Of the approximately 138,000 words in the GNT, it is interesting to note that one can reach the 400,000 variants by using the same 138,000 words. Here is how
                      Message 10 of 12 , Apr 4, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Of the approximately 138,000 words in the GNT, it is
                        interesting to note that one can reach the 400,000
                        variants by using the same 138,000 words. Here is how
                        that would happen visually.

                        Use any base text you like; it is irrelevant, other
                        than it must be a complete GNT. Just to cover all
                        bases, let's do two experiments: one using the
                        Majority Text, the other using the Critical Text.

                        Let's use John 1.1a as an example:

                        EN ARCH HN hO LOGOS (base text)
                        1. ARCH HN hO LOGOS (EN omitted)
                        2. EN ARCH hO LOGOS (HN omitted)
                        3. hO LOGOS HN EN ARCH (word order)
                        4. hO LOGOS EN ARCH HN (word order)
                        5. LOGOS HN EN ARCH (hO omitted)
                        6. HN EN ARCH LOGOS (2 variants, hO omitted, word
                        order)
                        7. ARCH HN hO LOGOS (EN omitted)
                        8. HN hO LOGOS ARCH (2 variants, EN omitted, word
                        order)
                        9. EN ARCH hO LOGOS (HN omitted)
                        10. EN ARC HN hO LOGOS (omitted letter in ARCH)
                        11. EN ACH HN LOGOS (omitted letter in ARCH and
                        omitted hO)
                        etc.

                        As you can see, I can exceed the 400,000 variants
                        without the need to ever use another word other than
                        those in the GNT. By the above permutations, I could
                        exceed millions of variants... all without using any
                        word outside the GNT. Of course, how hard would it be
                        to reconstruct the 'original' text in this instance.

                        Since most variants fall into the categories of
                        "insignificant," I'm wondering if there is a better
                        way to present the data so as to give people an
                        accurate estimate of the reliability of the mss
                        evidence.

                        I think Dr. Daniel Wallace's statement that there are
                        about 1,400 meaningful and viable variants, but not
                        one of these affects any cardinal doctrine, is on the
                        right track. And he also adds that this 1,400 means
                        99% of the original GNT has been reconstructed.




                        Eddie Mishoe
                        Pastor


                        ____________________________________________________________________________________
                        You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.
                        http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
                      • Greg Sahlstrom
                        I recently read a 1966 article that estimated New Testament textual variants as perhaps 300,000. More recently estimates of 300,000 to 400,000 appeared in
                        Message 11 of 12 , Apr 4, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I recently read a 1966 article that estimated New Testament textual
                          variants as perhaps 300,000. More recently estimates of 300,000 to
                          400,000 appeared in Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus". Yet, books
                          I've read have largely based their estimates of variants on
                          multiplying estimates that were based on John Mill's listing of
                          variants in 1707. Of the 300,000 - 400,000 variants in manuscripts
                          (or whatever the current total might be), I read that these represent
                          perhaps 10,000 places in the New Testament. Does anyone have sources
                          of newer information that include some sort of verification of the
                          numbers (more than educated guesses)?

                          Greg Sahlstrom
                        • Michael Marlowe
                          ... Eddie, thanks for this. I think it shows how useless this kind of number-crunching can be--especially in a linguistic field of study like TC--and how
                          Message 12 of 12 , Apr 5, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Eddie Mishoe wrote:

                            > Let's use John 1.1a as an example:
                            >
                            > EN ARCH HN hO LOGOS (base text)
                            > 1. ARCH HN hO LOGOS (EN omitted)
                            > 2. EN ARCH hO LOGOS (HN omitted)
                            > 3. hO LOGOS HN EN ARCH (word order)
                            > 4. hO LOGOS EN ARCH HN (word order)
                            > 5. LOGOS HN EN ARCH (hO omitted)
                            > 6. HN EN ARCH LOGOS (2 variants, hO omitted, word
                            > order)
                            > 7. ARCH HN hO LOGOS (EN omitted)
                            > 8. HN hO LOGOS ARCH (2 variants, EN omitted, word
                            > order)
                            > 9. EN ARCH hO LOGOS (HN omitted)
                            > 10. EN ARC HN hO LOGOS (omitted letter in ARCH)
                            > 11. EN ACH HN LOGOS (omitted letter in ARCH and
                            > omitted hO)
                            > etc.
                            >
                            > As you can see, I can exceed the 400,000 variants
                            > without the need to ever use another word other than
                            > those in the GNT. By the above permutations, I could
                            > exceed millions of variants...


                            Eddie, thanks for this. I think it shows how useless this kind of
                            number-crunching can be--especially in a linguistic field of study like
                            TC--and how misleading statistics can be when they are presented without
                            exact and complete information about how they were generated.

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