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

RE: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

Expand Messages
  • David Robert Palmer
    Hi George, Regarding the IDOU in Rev. 16:15 I would think neither I nor anyone else would even contemplate a conjectural emendation that would eliminate the
    Message 1 of 14 , Aug 3, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi George,

      Regarding the IDOU in Rev. 16:15 I would think neither I nor anyone else would even contemplate a conjectural emendation that would eliminate the IDOU, since the 300 or so Greek manuscripts are unanimous as to its reading, except for one misspelling that still supports it.

      David Robert Palmer


      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      From: gfsomsel@...
      Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:56:29 -0700
      Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

       

      Yes, it was a typo.  That should have been Re 16.15.  Unfortunately I have had trouble copying and pasting text into my email lately with the result that sometimes it gets truncated while at other times text somehow gets stuffed in the middle of it.  I'll try again but will type the text this time.
       
      Ἰδοὺ ἔρχομαι ὡς κλέπτης. μακάριος ὁ γρηγορῶν καὶ τηρῶν τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, ἵνα μὴ γυμνὸς περιπατῇ καὶ βλέπωσιν τὴν ἀσμοσύνην αὐτοῦ.
       

       
      george
      gfsomsel


      … search for truth, hear truth,
      learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
      defend the truth till death.


      - Jan Hus
      _________



      From: David Robert Palmer <davekanaka@live. com>
      To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
      Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 6:37:21 PM
      Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

       

      George, I am interested in your comments on "Re 15:15," except that there is no such verse as Revelation 15:15.  Was this a typo?  There is an IDOU in Rev. 15:5 that is found in the TR, but in no Greek manuscripts.

      << That is Re 15.15 ἰδού which seems to be simply thrown into the passage ...>>


    • George F Somsel
      I am not suggesting the elimination though I find that a tempting solution.  BTW: If I were, it would not be simply the ἰδοὺ but rather the
      Message 2 of 14 , Aug 4, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        I am not suggesting the elimination though I find that a tempting solution.  BTW: If I were, it would not be simply the ἰδοὺ but rather the entire clause from ἰδοὺ to ἀσμοσύνη αὐτοῦ.  I am simply expressing a disease with the clause which seems to be dropped into the context completely gratuitously.  How does it relate to its context?  IT DOESN'T !

         
        george
        gfsomsel


        … search for truth, hear truth,
        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
        defend the truth till death.


        - Jan Hus
        _________



        . From: David Robert Palmer <davekanaka@...>
        To: textualcriticism <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tue, August 3, 2010 10:38:17 PM
        Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

         

        Hi George,

        Regarding the IDOU in Rev. 16:15 I would think neither I nor anyone else would even contemplate a conjectural emendation that would eliminate the IDOU, since the 300 or so Greek manuscripts are unanimous as to its reading, except for one misspelling that still supports it.

        David Robert Palmer


        To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
        From: gfsomsel@yahoo. com
        Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:56:29 -0700
        Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

         

        Yes, it was a typo.  That should have been Re 16.15.  Unfortunately I have had trouble copying and pasting text into my email lately with the result that sometimes it gets truncated while at other times text somehow gets stuffed in the middle of it.  I'll try again but will type the text this time.
         
        Ἰδοὺ ἔρχομαι ὡς κλέπτης. μακάριος ὁ γρηγορῶν καὶ τηρῶν τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, ἵνα μὴ γυμνὸς περιπατῇ καὶ βλέπωσιν τὴν ἀσμοσύνην αὐτοῦ.
         

         
        george
        gfsomsel


        … search for truth, hear truth,
        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
        defend the truth till death.


        - Jan Hus
        _________



        From: David Robert Palmer <davekanaka@live. com>
        To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
        Sent: Thu, July 29, 2010 6:37:21 PM
        Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

         

        George, I am interested in your comments on "Re 15:15," except that there is no such verse as Revelation 15:15.  Was this a typo?  There is an IDOU in Rev. 15:5 that is found in the TR, but in no Greek manuscripts.

        << That is Re 15.15 ἰδού which seems to be simply thrown into the passage ...>>



      • Heterodoxus
        gfsomsel: Truncating your message seems to be a non-issue since a photo image of p47 shows that it, too, is truncated (lacuna) halfway through Rev. 16:14. As
        Message 3 of 14 , Aug 4, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          gfsomsel: Truncating your message seems to be a non-issue since a photo image of p47 shows that it, too, is truncated (lacuna) halfway through Rev. 16:14.  As regards Dr. Palmer's statement that "the 300 or so Greek manuscripts are unanimous as to its reading".  U.Muenster indicates that Rev. 16:15 appears in only 3 mss prior to IV CE (p47, 01, and 02, where ου or υ, for whatever reason, is added by other hands into p47 and 02.  I'm not, however, saying the Dr, Palmer is incorrect in his count.

          Pat
           
          Archaeologists discover unknown artifacts.
          Diplomatists discuss known events.
          Theologists disseminate the unknowable as religious truth.



          From: David Robert Palmer <davekanaka@...>
          To: textualcriticism <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Wed, August 4, 2010 1:38:17 AM
          Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

           

          Hi George,

          Regarding the IDOU in Rev. 16:15 I would think neither I nor anyone else would even contemplate a conjectural emendation that would eliminate the IDOU, since the 300 or so Greek manuscripts are unanimous as to its reading, except for one misspelling that still supports it.

          David Robert Palmer


          To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
          From: gfsomsel@yahoo. com
          Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 04:56:29 -0700
          Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation 

          ... I have had trouble copying and pasting text into my email lately with the result that sometimes it gets truncated while at other times text somehow gets stuffed in the middle of it.  I'll try again but will type the text this time.
           
          Ἰδοὺ ἔρχομαι ὡς κλέπτης. μακάριος ὁ γρηγορῶν καὶ τηρῶν τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, ἵνα μὴ γυμνὸς περιπατῇ καὶ βλέπωσιν τὴν ἀσμοσύνην αὐτοῦ.

          george
          gfsomsel

        • David Robert Palmer
          George, I sure do see what you mean. Many translations put the whole verse in parentheses. (Not brackets.) But there are a few other instances of this in
          Message 4 of 14 , Aug 5, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            George, I sure do see what you mean.  Many translations put the whole verse in parentheses.  (Not brackets.)  But there are a few other instances of this in the Apocalypse of John.
             
            Charles in his edition removed it from 16:15 and put it after 3:3, and that does make a lot of sense, and does fit the context. 
             
            George, do you have a TC explanation about how this verse might have gotten misplaced early in the transmission?
             
            David Robert Palmer

            Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2010 5:02 AM
            Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Georg Luck: Conjectural Emendation

             

            I am not suggesting the elimination though I find that a tempting solution.  BTW: If I were, it would not be simply the ἰδοὺ but rather the entire clause from ἰδοὺ to ἀσμοσύνη αὐτοῦ.  I am simply expressing a disease with the clause which seems to be dropped into the context completely gratuitously.  How does it relate to its context?  IT DOESN'T !

             
            george
            gfsomsel
          • David Robert Palmer
            Hello Pat. I think you are misunderstanding the Muenster apparatus, which is easy to do. They show those OU and U you speak of, in brackets, because those
            Message 5 of 14 , Aug 5, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Hello Pat.
               
              I think you are misunderstanding the Muenster apparatus, which is easy to do.  They show those "OU" and "U" you speak of, in brackets, because those letters are not present, visible or clear in those manuscripts.  But all of those mss support IDOU.
               
              I said 300 manuscripts only as approximately, not exactly.  But in all of the mss I have collation of (Hoskier), it is unanimous, except for variant spellings.  One ms says DOU.
               
              Pat, thank-you for calling me "Dr. Palmer" but I am not a doctor.  I have formal theological training, and I also did take linguistics in the University of Oregon (via S.I.L.), but I never completed a college degree.
               
              (There are many Dr. Palmers on the Internet, even Dr. David Palmers.)  There are even two other David Robert Palmers out there- one is a stage actor in England.  This is why I spell out all three of my names.
               
              I am not bashfull, however, about my opinions, since I have been studying New Testament Greek since 1978, and been translating it pretty much that long as well.  I feel completely qualified to participate in a discussion about translating New Testament Greek.  Especially about the Apocalypse of John, since I have translated it, and am more familiar than many people about the manuscripts of it.  But I am far far from an expert or authority on textual criticism.  I have no formal training in TC. 
               
              I am very interested in George's explanation as to how a verse could have migrated from Rev. 3:3 to Rev 16:15.  I would also like to hear about this from the bigger names that might be lurking on this list.

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