Thu Apr 4 18:56:32 1996

From majordom  Thu Apr  4 18:56:32 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA25112; Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:56:32 +0500
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 18:53:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: Jn 9.38 Text
In-Reply-To: <199604041614.LAA25410@r02n06.cac.psu.edu>
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 2622
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu



On Thu, 4 Apr 1996, William L. Petersen wrote:

> First, everyone should remember that both NA (all editions) and UBS (all
> editions) are merely _pocket editions_ . . . Its apparatus is, therefore,
> always utterly incomplete and inadequate for serious textual study of the
> NT. . . .  

> this example shows, once again, the necessity of NEVER ignoring von
> Soden, Tischendorf or the IGNT. . . . You will then be amazed how many times
> you realize, when using just these pocket editions:  "Oh, yes, but there are
> lots of other variants here, and much more MS/versional support for these
> readings.

Mr. Petersen is absolutely correct on these points.  I try to keep my 
Tischendorf and Von Soden with me as much as possible because of these 
factors.  

In regard to the John 9.38 reading, now that I know which one it was, I 
am still somewhat surprised that UBS4 would bother including it, since it 
is so obviously secondary, and reflects an "orthodox corruption" which 
harmonizes to a parallel passage, plus is so limited in its support.

> (2) the variant seems to be of interest from a textual point of view,
> for it echoes John 11.27 

The variant also echoes Jn.1:9, and it may have been that more familiar
passage which triggered the scribe to initiate the harmonization and to
leap ahead to the parallel in 11.27 (which may well have been known from
memory). 

> it is [also] found in MS (v.S.) Ir 1083, which,
> in Gregory numbers is MS 1187.  1187 is an XI cent. MS now in St. Catherines
> (Mt. Sinai);  Lectionary 253 is in St. Petersburg.  One wonders if, because
> of this distinctive link between the two and their origin in the same
> century, they are not privy to the same tradition, either textual or
> liturgical.  

I would not think this likely, but due to the nature of the phrase (being 
a confessional statement), it probably ended up in both MSS as the 
incorporation of a gloss from memory.  That any liturgical tradition 
seriously utilized this confession as part of the lection beyond the 
solitary lectionary cited and MS 1187 (which like most minuscules was 
probably rubricated for lectionary use) is not very likely, given the 
paucity of evidence.  I'll bet that in the churches which used those two 
MSS, however, the extended confessional statement was read regularly. *;-)


_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Assoc. Prof./Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back