Subject: tc-list P5 from C/B

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:04:13 -0400

In this ms c/b have the transcription exactly until line 9- where Hirunuma
has Humin c/b has Humwn.  on the same line Hirunuma has sthkei where c/b
have esthken (Jn 1:26).  Through the remainder of this sample (line 15) the
transcriptions are exact.

(On a side note- C/b's transcription matches the text of NA 27 exactly-
whereas Hirunuma's adoption of Humin has no mss attestation and his reading
of sthkei is found in B, L, 083, F1.)  

Given the evidence (for these 15 sample lines), C/B's transcription of P5,
where they have followed P5 itself, is 100% accurate while Hirunuma's
transcription has been erroneous at two points.

Again, C/B's transcription of this sample demonstrates 100% accuracy.

More data for the database.

Best,

Jim

+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
email- [email-masked]
web page-  http://web.infoave.net/~jwest

---

From: M A Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT

On Sat, 22 May 1999 16:04:13 -0400 Jim West <[email-masked]> writes:

>From what Jim reports, it sounds like Hirunuma's book is perhaps as
equally defective as C/B in regard to errors. Hirunuma simply might make
his errors in different places than do C/B.

But let's talk about p5 (EMPHATICALLY, so the point won't be missed) and
what you have mentioned:

>In this ms c/b have the transcription exactly until line 9- where
Hirunuma has 
>Humin c/b has Humwn.  on the same line Hirunuma has sthkei where c/b
have >esthken (Jn 1:26).  

Do you realize what you are discussing here?  P5 is NOT EXTANT in the
portions you just cited.  Line 9 ENDS -- is DEFECTIVE -- following DATI
M[       (look at which direction the bracket is pointing in C/B). There
is NO error of transcription involved whatsoever. The differences involve
how Hirunuma and C/B choose to RECONSTRUCT the TOTALLY MISSING PORTION of
text in that line.  Look at the bracket in C/B once more.....  The hUMWN
or hUMIN and STHKEI or ESTHKEN are NON-EXTANT in the preserved portion of
P5, so there is NO point whatsoever to be made here regarding the
"accuracy" of C/B..  

Now for your further comment:

>whereas Hirunuma's adoption of Humin has no mss attestation and his 
>reading of sthkei is found in B, L, 083, F1.)  

>Given the evidence (for these 15 sample lines), C/B's transcription of 
>P5, where they have followed P5 itself, is 100% accurate while
Hirunuma's
>transcription has been erroneous at two points.

OF COURSE there will be differences in the reconstructed MISSING
portions, since there is NO certain text to guide the editors involved.
But WHY do C/B "match the text of NA27 exactly" and get this "100%"
rating?  Because, as they state plainly in their introduction, p. 15:

"The supplied letters and words often, but not always, accord with the
text printed in the twenty-seventh edition of Nestle-Aland's _Novum
Testamentum Graece_."  

KEIN WUNDER!

>Through the remainder of this sample (line 15) the

Given that the reconstructions otherwise agree and that the actual text
present of P5 might also agree, that leaf well may be depicted accurately
for the p5 text which is present. Granted. But this settles nothing
regarding the errors elsewhere.

While we are on p5, take note of the photo on p.62 which C/B state shows
Jn 1:33-40  (fol.1r).  (They err once more, since the same photo also
shows part of Jn 20:11-17 (from fol.3r), but they failed to label that
part -- another error to add to the old database....):

I will grant that the extant portion of the Jn 1:33-40 segment is
transcribed accurately. 
However, within the 20:11-17 portion in the same photo, the C/B
transcription of fol. 3r in 20:12 (following Grenfell and Hunt's
transcription in the  _editio princeps_!) reads REI  at the beginning of
line 7 when the photo indicates the apparently itacistic RAI (the A is
partially missing, but the slant of the back of the letter A is clearly
present; thus the text apparently _cannot_ be REI as C/B or Grenfell/Hunt
transcribed. What does Hirunuma say at that point?).

>More data for the database.

It does not seem so in this case if the above reading is valid..

==============================================================
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D.
Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA