Subject: Re: MT/BT

From: [email-masked] (Dale M. Wheeler)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 11:06:58 -0800

Klaus Wachtel wrote:

>On Wednesday 13 Mar, Maurice Robinson wrote:
>
>> The overwhelming majority of post-10th century minuscules are secondary in
>> cases such as 1 Jn.2:23 and 1 Jn.3:1, since that mere numerical majority
>> is not supported by the earlier testimony.
>
>May I ask, then, on which earlier testimony the decision for the Byz. text EK 
>instead of XWRIS is based in James 2,18 (except the doubtful evidence of P54)?

I wonder if you could elaborate on why YOU think the p54 evidence is so
doubtful (which no doubt corresponds to why the listing changed from NA26 to
p54vid in NA27).

***********************************************************************
Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept                  Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street                               Portland, OR  97220
Voice: 503-251-6416    FAX:503-254-1268     E-Mail: [email-masked] 
***********************************************************************

---

From: Klaus Wachtel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 12:26:53 +0000

> doubtful (which no doubt corresponds to why the listing changed from NA26 to

In P54, fr. a, recto, line 6, the second PISTIN in 2,18 seems to be followed by 
an epsilon and faint traces of a kappa, although Schofields reading XW[RIS] (no 
dots below XW) cannot be ruled out with certainty.

K. Wachtel, INTF Muenster

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 07:30:05 -0500 (EST)

> dots below XW) cannot be ruled out with certainty.

That papyrus is at Princeton, and perhaps some of the TC-list subscribers 
are from there and can check the original.  Barring that, might anyone 
have information as to where a photograph of that papyrus leaf might be 
found? (Elliott's book might give some clues).

>From using Schofield previously, I would suspect his reading might be 
correct.  Even though I favor the Byzantine text, I harbor no suspicions 
that Byzantine readings will always or even frequently be found in 
Egyptian papyri.  In light of the remainder of the Alexandrian witnesses 
(not to mention the Latin and Coptic versional evidence), the reading 
XWRIS would fit p54 best.

=========================================================================
                       Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.
            Associate Professor of Greek and New Testament
              Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
                      Wake Forest, North Carolina
                   <[email-masked]>
=========================================================================

---

From: Klaus Wachtel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 17:21:12 +0000

> dots below XW) cannot be ruled out with certainty.

Sorry, I forgot to specify my source as to Schofield's reading:
E.H. Kase, Papyri in the Princeton University Collections, vol. II, Princeton 1936, No. 
15.