Subject: Re: 2,500 new Hebrew manuscripts?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:48:41 -0500 (EST)

Ron Minton wrote:

<< I recently received this communication:
 
 "Given the recent (1990) discovery of 2,500 Hebrew manuscripts, all 
 dating earlier than Kittel's [Leningrad], one can easily assert that 
 Kittel's text is based on "less than 1% of the available data."  The NKJV 
 was published before these manuscripts were discovered." >>

Riplinger continues to propagate false information, even though she has been
informed otherwise. Because the NKJV is a revision of the KJV, it was based
on exactly the same texts as the KJV 1611. It followed the Textus Receptus of
the NT and Bomberg's 2nd edition (1525/26) for the OT--the primary text [TR]
used by the KJV translators. The introduction to the NKJV mentions BHS [not
BHK!] as one of the textual sources, but also Bomberg. In every place where
BHS differed from Bomberg, the NKJV followed Bomberg, with a marginal note
indicating that fact. As executive editor of the NKJV OT, I made sure of
that. I personally told her that in a letter a couple of years age. Given the
fact that she believes that the KJV is far superior to any Hebrew MSS of any
number or date, that she knows nothing about Hebrew, and that she has no idea
what the texts of the alleged new MSS say, her attack on the textual base of
the NKJV is nothing but vicious propaganda.

<< Is she speaking of the Biblical Archaeology Review article?  Is there 
 anything to the 2,500 new mss.? >>

I personally have not read anything about this, even though I read BAR from
cover to cover. What is the reference?

Sincerely,
James D. Price

---

From: "Ronald L. Minton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 18:41:08 -0600 (CST)

On Wed, 19 Feb 1997 [email-masked] wrote:
> << "Given the recent (1990) discovery of 2,500 Hebrew manuscripts, all 

For clarification to all:  Gail Riplinger claims that 2,500 Hebrew 
manuscripts were discovered in 1990 ( all older than Codex Leningrad).
Since I had not heard of any such discovery, I thought she might have 
been confused with some recent article about Hebrew manuscripts.  Since 
she is familiar with BAR, I thought she might have confused the Cairo Ginesah
collection of 140,000 mss that were reported in the Sept/Oct 96 issue.  Even 
though the article was written to celebrate the 100th year anniversary of 
moving the collection to England, this is all I could think of that she 
might be referring to.  It reflects her level of research, and I assumed she 
has some basis for her claim.  All I want to know is: has anyone heard 
of a 1990 discovery as noted above.

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