Subject: And the Winner Is....

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 13:08:41 -0500 (CDT)

TCers --

I guess it's true. Make something controversial, and more people
will get interested in it. Over the last ten days or so, my web
site has experienced a huge upsurge in traffic -- all of ten hits
per day, up from about six per day in the preceding weeks.
If we keep this up, no doubt we will cause the server to
break down. :-)

Now for the results of the voting on the Fathers page. Apparently
I didn't need to wait; no new people were heard from. Although
I did receive a clarification, which made it clear that the
person's approval was conditional. Since I cannot guarantee to
meet the conditions, I make the final score eight in favour
of the page, five opposed, and two neutral. So I suppose the
page will stay. If it makes those of you who were opposed
feel any better, I truly regret putting it up there. :-)

I just posted a second draft of the page. This incorporates,
in one form or another, all the information sent to me so far.
It also includes, in LARGE UNFRIENDLY LETTERS, a warning saying
that the page needs work.

I did make some other changes -- fixing some typos, adding a
little new information, and starting the list of sources.
The latter is going to take longer than I thought; I'm going
to have to go through every book again. And I'm also under
several deadlines this week....

I will repeat my appeal: If you have anything to add, let me
know.

Also, a suggestion (or should I say an order?) from Matthew
Johnson. He suggests that we need to list critical editions
for all the fathers cited. Now I would argue that this is
a job for an Introduction, not an Encyclopedia -- but I would
also agree that this is a good thing to have on line where it
can be updated frequently.

My problem is, I don't have the information required. Do people
want this enough to be willing to help out?

Also, it occurs to me that we might want to have some sort of
notation for the critical methodology used. Particularly in
assessing the text-type of the Father. For example -- for all
that I disagree with the details of Ehrman's Comprehensive
Profile Method -- I readily concede that it is the best tool
currently in use for determining text-types. So an assessment
based on this method would be far better than an assessment
based on, say, divergences from the TR.

Comments? Volunteers?

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                     [email-masked]

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)

---

From: Sipilä Seppo <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:45:10 EET DST

Dear Mr Waltz

Concerning the Fathers page, which I had some troubles to look at. 
(You could add a backflash at the end of the URL on your signature, 
just in case there are some other dummies like me.... :-)

> I will repeat my appeal: If you have anything to add, let me

I have some suggestions

a) concerning Epiphanius: I wonder if you could mention his _De 
mensuris et ponderibus_ which was a fairly important "encyclopedia" 
of biblical matters in Antiquity. The problem with the work is, of 
course, that it is not completly extant in Greek any longer, but in 
Syriac.

b) concerning Origen: Is it so clear that he knew Hebrew? Sidney 
Jellicoe in his "The Septuagint and the modern Study" (OUP, Oxford 
1968) offers a discussion of the matter (pp 104-106) but does not say 
how to solve the problem. Therefore I would suggest that you, instead 
of "he took the trouble to learn Hebrew" would use something like 
"perhaps he took..." or "it is claimed that he took..."

Oh yes, a typo: you have _Theodotian_, should be _Theodotion_

c) concerning Theodoret: I think that the way you describe his 
literary activity, does not give the reader the right idea. Because 
you say that "In addition to writings on these subjects [= 
christological debate] he wrote a commentary on the Pauline Epistles" 
the reader thinks that Thdt did not wrote any other exegetical work 
at all, but surely this is not the case. It may be the case that his 
commentary on the Pauline Ep. is the most important work from the 
point of view of the NTTC, but nevertheless you could say that there 
are some other writings, like commentaries on the Octateuch and on 
Kindoms and Chronicles [these are of importance in the TC of the 
LXX].

When discussing the use of Fathers in TC, you describe three problems 
concerning the works of the Fathers. The first one is _not_ very 
serious, I think, and you could even say that. 

You could perhaps also say that one of the disturbing things with 
many Fathers is that the same author uses different wordings of the 
same biblical passage in different works! The problem is, of course, 
that it is difficult to know the reason for that and that it 
is also very difficult to know the actual wording(s) the given 
Father had access to. This has some relevance when we try to find out 
the texttype the Father is using.

> for all the fathers cited.

Instead of compling such a list you could say that the list is 
possible to compile by using a very usefull list of all the editions 
of the works of the Greek Fathers:
       Geerard, M (editor): _Clavis Patrum Graecorum_ 1-5 (Turnhout 
       1974-1987)

One needs only to check from a standard bibliography, like _L'Annee 
Philologique_ or _Bibliographia Patristica_ if there are new 
editions published since the Clavis came out.

The most important editions are also mentioned in the patrology of 
Altaner-Stuiber (the latest German edition appeared in 1993). The 
English translation is outdated what comes to the editions.

Hope you will find these suggestions of some value!

Seppo

---

Mr Seppo Sipila
Department of Biblical Studies
University of Helsinki
[email-masked]
http://www.helsinki.fi/~sesipila/

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 07:28:55 -0500 (CDT)

>just in case there are some other dummies like me.... :-)

I corrected some errors in the HTML yesterday. Beyond that, all I can
say is that the page works on my machine. :-)

>course, that it is not completly extant in Greek any longer, but in 

Thank you.

>"perhaps he took..." or "it is claimed that he took..."

Well -- he *did* produce the Hexapla. Conceding that his Hebrew
may not have been perfect, he must have had some knowledge of the
language to have attempted such a thing.

>Oh yes, a typo: you have _Theodotian_, should be _Theodotion_

Thanks.

>Kindoms and Chronicles [these are of importance in the TC of the 

OK.

>the texttype the Father is using.

I thought I had said that. :-) I will try to make it clearer.

>       Geerard, M (editor): _Clavis Patrum Graecorum_ 1-5 (Turnhout 

I will try to find these books. I may not succeed; I have access to
only one seminary, and I do not have loan priviledges. I also don't
read German. (Remember, I'm a physicist and mathematician, not a
linguist.) But I will try.

And thank you for the suggestions.

Bob Waltz
[email-masked]

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:59:07 -0500 (CDT)

On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, I myself wrote to this list when I meant to post
a private response.

You have my apologies. I just assumed the original message was off-list.

Bob Waltz
[email-masked]