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

Rev 1:10 in the Spirit on the Lord's Day

Expand Messages
  • Dirk Jongkind
    I have before me Tregelles text of Revelation (published 1848) with a curious reception history . On page 6 the words EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI EN TH KURIAKH
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 19, 2008
      I have before me Tregelles' text of Revelation (published 1848) with a
      curious 'reception history'. On page 6 the words EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI EN
      TH KURIAKH HMERA are literally cut out. Very neatly done, but it is the
      only such rigorous action in the whole book, as far as I can see. I do
      not know of any relevant textual variant at this point, but somebody
      must have felt quite strongly against these words.

      The only bit of additional information is that on the title page there
      is the inscription "Jo. Franklin 30/9/89" (first 3 letters uncertain,
      and date is from the 19th century) and that when it was once sold in a
      second-hand book shop, the proprietor wrote on a fly-leaf 'one page
      imperfect' (apparently referring to our page 6). Thus it reached Tyndale
      House already in this mutilated stage absolving Peter Head from any
      guilt (he is the only other person ever to have checked out this book).

      Does anyone know about anyone who wants these words removed?

      Regards,
      Dirk


      --
      Dirk Jongkind, PhD
      Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
      John W. Laing Fellow, Tyndale House
      Tyndale House
      36 Selwyn Gardens
      Cambridge, CB3 9BA Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
      United Kingdom Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
    • Peter M. Head
      Dirk, I am happy to receive this absolution. It was not only Marcion who conducted his scholarship with a pen-knife, so I shall be happy if the librarian
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 19, 2008
        Dirk,

        I am happy to receive this absolution. It was not only Marcion who
        conducted his scholarship with a pen-knife, so I shall be happy if
        the librarian doesn't think I would do such a thing.

        Perhaps we could question whether this cutting out necessarily
        reflects a negative perception (you said "somebody
        must have felt quite strongly against these words"). Perhaps they
        were cut out in order to be stuck somewhere else, as a reminder or a
        poster or some such thing. It could be an indication that somebody
        felt quite strongly for these words.

        Peter

        At 13:31 19/08/2008, you wrote:
        >I have before me Tregelles' text of Revelation (published 1848) with a
        >curious 'reception history'. On page 6 the words EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI EN
        >TH KURIAKH HMERA are literally cut out. Very neatly done, but it is the
        >only such rigorous action in the whole book, as far as I can see. I do
        >not know of any relevant textual variant at this point, but somebody
        >must have felt quite strongly against these words.
        >
        >The only bit of additional information is that on the title page there
        >is the inscription "Jo. Franklin 30/9/89" (first 3 letters uncertain,
        >and date is from the 19th century) and that when it was once sold in a
        >second-hand book shop, the proprietor wrote on a fly-leaf 'one page
        >imperfect' (apparently referring to our page 6). Thus it reached Tyndale
        >House already in this mutilated stage absolving Peter Head from any
        >guilt (he is the only other person ever to have checked out this book).
        >
        >Does anyone know about anyone who wants these words removed?
        >
        >Regards,
        >Dirk
        >
        >
        >--
        >Dirk Jongkind, PhD
        >Fellow and Tutor, St. Edmund's College
        >John W. Laing Fellow, Tyndale House
        >Tyndale House
        >36 Selwyn Gardens
        >Cambridge, CB3 9BA Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
        >United Kingdom Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
        >
        >
        >
        >------------------------------------
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        Peter M. Head, PhD
        Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
        Tyndale House
        36 Selwyn Gardens
        Cambridge CB3 9BA
        01223 566601
      • David Robert Palmer
        Dirk Jongkind wrote:
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 19, 2008
          Dirk Jongkind wrote:
           
          <<  I have before me Tregelles' text of Revelation (published 1848) with a curious 'reception history'. On page 6 the words EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI EN TH KURIAKH HMERA are literally cut out. Very neatly done, but it is the only such rigorous action in the whole book, as far as I can see. I do not know of any relevant textual variant at this point, but somebody must have felt quite strongly against these words.  >>
           
          If this was done because of strong feelings against the words, the prime candidates would be those groups who strongly insist on observance of 7th day Sabbath- Seventh Day Adventists, and to a lesser likelihood, Messianic Jews.
           
          This phrase "The Lord's Day" is one of the main texts for teaching that Sunday is the Lord's day.  It is not a phrase used to refer to the 7th day Sabbath, but to the "first day of the week" to which the early Christians seem to have gradually migrated their assemblies.
           
          David Robert Palmer


        • David Robert Palmer
          Looking at Hoskier, I see that: manuscript 2050 omits EN PNEUMATI EN TH, and manuscripts 2053 and 2062 omit EN TH KRIAKH HMERA David Robert Palmer_,_._,___
          Message 4 of 5 , Aug 19, 2008
             Looking at Hoskier, I see that:
            manuscript 2050 omits EN PNEUMATI EN TH, and
            manuscripts 2053 and 2062 omit EN TH KRIAKH HMERA
             
            David Robert Palmer_,_._,___
          • donrogan25
            ... with a curious reception history . On page 6 the words EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI EN TH KURIAKH HMERA are literally cut out. Very neatly done, but it is the
            Message 5 of 5 , Aug 19, 2008
              --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "David Robert Palmer"
              <watutman@...> wrote:
              >
              > Dirk Jongkind wrote:
              >
              > << I have before me Tregelles' text of Revelation (published 1848)
              with a curious 'reception history'. On page 6 the words EGENOMHN EN
              PNEUMATI EN TH KURIAKH HMERA are literally cut out. Very neatly done,
              but it is the only such rigorous action in the whole book, as far as I
              can see. I do not know of any relevant textual variant at this point,
              but somebody must have felt quite strongly against these words. >>
              >
              > If this was done because of strong feelings against the words, the
              prime candidates would be those groups who strongly insist on
              observance of 7th day Sabbath- Seventh Day Adventists, and to a lesser
              likelihood, Messianic Jews.
              >
              > This phrase "The Lord's Day" is one of the main texts for teaching
              that Sunday is the Lord's day. It is not a phrase used to refer to
              the 7th day Sabbath, but to the "first day of the week" to which the
              early Christians seem to have gradually migrated their assemblies.
              >
              > David Robert Palmer
              >


              I merely want to share some thoughts on when Sunday observance began
              to take place and question whether the "Lord's Day" is a reference t
              Sunday by John. To John, what was the "Lord's Day"? We know of no
              passage of scripture that indicates what "the Lord's Day" really is in
              scripture. In post-apostolic times it meant in the writings of the
              church fathers "the first day of the week" but this connection is
              lacking in the scriptures. There could be a few suggestions as to what
              it could possibly mean rather than rely on the interpretation of a
              Catholic Church Father.

              Dr. Marvin Wilson in his book "Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the
              Christian Faith" on pages 79-81 writes:
              "Between the First and Second Jewish Revolts the widening breach
              between Synagogue and Church also manifested itself through changing
              attitudes regarding Sabbath worship. The issue of the Sabbath provides
              a useful historical example of a point at which the Church became
              seperated from its original place within the structure of Judaism. But
              in addition, by Christianity's rejection of the Sabbath and much of
              the rest of the Mosaic Law, it sent out a clear message that it had
              rejected Israel as well.
              Though the early Church observed the Sabbath, in time it came to
              worship on Sunday, the day of Jesus' resurrection (cf. Matt. 28:1).
              But both Jew and Christian recognized that Sunday was also a Roman
              holy day tied to sun-worship. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, indicates
              that this change had begun to take place as early as about A.D. 115.
              He wrote to the Magnesians, telling them to "no longer live for the
              Sabbath but for the Lord's Day, on which our life rose." 'The
              Didache', a manual of church instruction written around A.D. 120, also
              directs Christians to come together on the Lord's Day to worship.
              On the issue of the Sabbath as well as other matters related to Jewish
              practice, the two communities--Church and Synagogue--took up opposing
              positions. Over the centuries the Jewish community has interpreted the
              Church's decision to worship on Sunday as a rejection of the very
              heart of Jewish experience--rejection of the Law. This move to Sunday
              worship made it exceedingly difficult, if not virtually impossible,
              for the Jew to give any serious consideration to the Christian
              message, or even to enter into Christian-Jewish dialog without
              suspicion. The Jew saw the Church's move to Sunday worship as a call
              to abandon the Law and embrace a "new covenant" that had now replaced
              the "old covenant", which was thus declared ineffective and passe....
              It is not known when the early church began Sunday worship. Both Acts
              20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2 may allude to Sunday as a day for meeting.
              But the New Testament writers provide us with no clear rationale for a
              shift from the seventh to the first day of the week. Perhaps the early
              Jewish followers of Jesus met in the synagogues on the Sabbath, and
              then met again as Christians (or ma'aminim, "believers"), following
              the 'Habdalah' ceromony (a ritual which ended the Sabbath), on
              Saturday evening after sundown to begin the first day of the week.
              Some New Testament texts hint that Saturday was not consistently
              observed as the one day of worship and rest (Romans 14:5-6, Gala.
              4:8-11; Col. 2:16-17), perhaps largely due to the sudden influx of
              many non-Jews into the early Church. The Sabbath commandment seems to
              have been considered part of the ceremonial law of Israel, and as such
              not a sine qua non for Church unity. Rather, the Church was to be a
              body not divided over Sabbath regulations, but united as a people
              among whom there is "neither Jew nor Greek...but all one in Christ
              Jewus" (Gal. 3:28).
              Apparently, the precise day of worship was not the key issue for the
              New Testament Church. Every day was to be holy unto the Lord..."


              A little of this history and the fact that the naming of the first day
              of the week as "the Lord's day" came from early church fathers rather
              than from the Bible itself makes me question that label for Sudnay. It
              is possible that it referred to the Sabbath for "the Son of man is
              also Lord of the Sabbath." It could also be possible that it is a
              reference to the day of the Lord. Who know?
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.