Subject: tc-list technical problems

From: "James R. Adair" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:24:49 -0500 (EST)

The tc-list experienced technical difficulties Sunday morning (6:00 a.m. 
EST U.S.), with the result that everyone was deleted from the list (this 
did not affect those subscribed to the digest form of the list).  I have 
now recreated the list, but it's possible that some people who had 
unsubscribed in the past now find themselves back on the list.  If that 
is the case, please unsubscribe again.  If any lists members hear of 
anyone who is no longer receiving message, please ask them to 
resubscribe.  I will resend the two messages that most list members 
(except those subscribed to the digest) missed.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

Jimmy Adair, Listowner, TC-List
Manager of Information Technology Services, Scholars Press
    and
Managing Editor of TELA, the Scholars Press World Wide Web Site
---------------> http://scholar.cc.emory.edu <-----------------

---

From: "Ronald L. Minton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:00:13 -0600 (CST)

Someone brought up the O'Callahan theory that ms 7Q5 dates to the first 
century and is from the Gospels.  What have papyrologists concluded on 
this in the last few years?  What do some you you who have studied this 
issue say?  Thanks ahead of time for the info .

--
Prof. Ron Minton: [email-masked]   W (417)268-6053  H 833-9581
Baptist Bible Graduate School 628 E. Kearney St. Springfield, MO 65803

---

From: "Ronald L. Minton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:04:33 -0600 (CST)

I am no expert on the ancient versions.  I have read a little as to whether 
the date of the Peshita is c.175 or 425.  Everyone seems to disagree.  
Can someone help me in this matter?

---

From: "Ronald L. Minton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:50:29 -0600 (CST)

I received an unsolicited video tape of Gail Riplinger on the KJV.  I 
only mention it to this group because she mocks Bruce Metzger and 
fabricates about Westcott and Hort and she does other text-critical 
gymnastics.  In March 96 I published an 
unfavorable book review of her NEW AGE VERSIONS.  In the tape, the 
moderator calls for me to be fired from my teaching position.  The tape 
is full of grossly misleading claims.  I do want to ask two things of the 
list.  She claims that some ancient papyri, including P66 as I recall, 
often have two dots (diacritical marks) to tell the next copier to omit 
these words in his copy.  I hate to seem ignorant (unlearned) here, but I 
don't want to criticize her work on this point if it is true, and I was 
not aware of the practice if it ever existed.  Can someone explain what she 
means and if there is any truth to it.
She also claims that the papyri agree with the TR 75% and with W-H only 
15%.  I know this is wrong, but can someone tell me where she gets this 
kind of data?  There must be a pseudo-scholar out there somewhere who 
feeds this false data to her type; it is causing me some headaches.

---

From: Jack Kilmon <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:18:59 -0600

> issue say?  Thanks ahead of time for the info .

	As you know, J. O'Callaghan identifies a few of the Greek
papyrus fragments from Cave 7 as New Testament writings.  Cave 7
is somewhat unique from the other caves in that it was a cave of
occupation.  He published his findings "Papiros Neotestamentarios
en la Cueva 7 de Qumran" in Biblica 53, 1972, Pp 91-100. He identified
7Q5 as Mark 6:52-53.  Many scholars disputed his findings and indeed
mostof the fragments are very questionable.  By the end of the 70's the
concensus of scholarly opinion was negative. In 1984, interest was again
stimulated for this 3.9 by 2.7 cm fragment by the eminent
literary critic, Carsten Peter Thiede.  See Thiede's"7Q-Eine Ruckkehr zu
den neutestamentlichen Papyrusfragmente in der siebten Hohle von Qumran'
Biblica 65, 1984, 538-559; 66, 1985, 21f.

	In an attempt to settle such an important issue, scientists from
various disciplines met in Eichstatt in 1991.  Coming down on the side
of 7Q5 as a fragment of Mark was Thiede, Herbert Hunger of Vienna,
Ferdinand Rohrhirsch, Harold Risenfeld and Eugen Ruckstuhl.  New
Testament Scholar Bernhard Mayer has edited and published the symposium,
"Christen und Christliches in Qumran?" Eichstatter Studien, Neue Folge
32, Regensburg 192. 

	Arguments against the fragment as Markan settles on some disputed
consonants.  Thiede was able to Make more consonants visible
by further forensicexamination in a crime lab in Israel in 1992.
His analysis supports O'Callaghan.

	The reconstructed Greek Text of 7Q5 is thus (reconstructions in
brackets):

	[SUNHKAN] E[PI TOIS ARTOIS]
	[ALLHN A]UTWN H [XARDIA PEPWRW-]
	[MEN]H  KAI TI[APERASANTES]
	[HLQON EIS GE]NNHS[ARET KAI]
	PROSWRMIS]ZHSA[N  KAI EXEL-]

	7Q5 is written in Herodian decorated style which places it to
50 CE and before.  I have no problem with this since I believe the first
autograph of Mark was written in the 40's.

	The best that can be said is that the identification of 7Q5
as Mark is uncertain but possible.  

Hope that helps.

Jack

Jack Kilmon
[email-masked]

---

From: "Professor L.W. Hurtado" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:26:40 +000

For information on scribal marks in P66, see V. Martin's edition, 
_Papyrus Bodmer II:  Evangile de Jean chap. 1-14_(Cologny-Geneve:  
Bibliotheque Bodmer, 1956), and for discussion of scribal 
corrections in P66, see G. D. Fee's monograph, _Papyrus Bodmer II 
(P66):  Its Textual Relationships and Scribal Characteristics_ (Salt 
Lake City:  Univ of Utah Press, 1968).

L. W. Hurtado
University of Edinburgh,
New College
Mound Place 
Edinburgh, Scotland EH1 2LX
Phone: 0131-650-8920
Fax: 0131-650-6579
E-mail:  [email-masked]

---

From: Vincent Broman <[email-masked]>
Date: 28 Jan 1997 16:11:32 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> whether the date of the Peshita is c.175 or 425.

The earliest manuscripts of the peshitta are early fifth century.
The earliest translation into Syriac might have been second century,
though the gospels were generally read in the diatessaron and not M+M+L+J.
Comparison of the Old Syriac and the Peshitta with patristic
quotations suggest that the Old Syriac translation(s) were
the earlier form of NT text.
The discussion in Metzger's book on the versions is quite good, except
that it seems clear that we don't have a satisfying explanation
of how the Peshitta came to be.

Vincent Broman         Email: [email-masked],[email-masked]     =   o     
2224 33d St.             Phone: +1 619 284 3775                    =  _ /- _   
San Diego, CA  92104-5605  Starship: 32d42m22s N 117d14m13s W     =  (_)> (_)  
___ PGP protected mail preferred.  For public key finger [email-masked] ___

---

From: Abigail Ann Young <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:05:26 -0500 (EST)

I am not so sure about generalizing about the practice in Greek MSS
(whether of the NT or of other texts), but expunction (deletion by the
use of little dots, usually under the letters/graphs used to spell or
abbreviate the word(s) in question) is a very common practice in Latin
MSS throughout the late ancient and mediaeval period. It's not
confined to MSS of the Latin Bible. There are other conventional signs
used for cancellation, as well as analogous uses of conventional signs
for other corrections, such as transposition, but I think expunction
is one of the most widespread.

A.

Dr Abigail Ann Young, Records of Early English Drama| young@chass.|
Victoria College, University of Toronto             | utoronto.ca |
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~reed/reed.html |  REED's Home Page  |
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~reed/stage.html|Our New Theatre Resource Page |