From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 2 03:00:02 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id DAA05938; Sun, 2 May 1999 03:00:01 -0400 Date: Sun, 2 May 1999 03:00:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199905020700.DAA05922@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> From: Jimmy Adair (tc-list-owner) Subject: tc-list Quarterly Reminder Content-Type: text Apparently-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 6863 ****************************************************************************** General Information about the List ****************************************************************************** tc-list: a discussion list of biblical textual criticism This list is loosely associated with the new electronic journal _TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism_, and it is intended for a discussion of any matters relating to biblical textual criticism, broadly defined. The rationale for the creation of the TC journal is given below. It is hoped that subscribers to the tc-list will reflect on and respond to material from articles in TC, will deal with issues that arise in the context of text-critical study in the community of biblical scholars at large, and will use the list to suggest new ideas and methodologies. Notes on any aspect of the textual criticism of the Jewish and Christian scriptures (including extracanonical and related literature) are welcome, and threads that transcend the traditional boundary between textual criticism of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and New Testament textual criticism are especially encouraged. We would also like to see threads that discuss the relationship between textual criticism and other disciplines. This list is an unmoderated list, and anyone who is a subscriber to the list may contribute. Conventional netiquette should be followed by all contributors to the list. The following points in particular should be kept in mind. (1) Discussion of topics other than textual criticism (or other topics likely to be of interest to members of the list) should be avoided. (2) Scholarly discussion can at times be somewhat heated, but civility should always prevail. (3) Contributors to the list should always sign their messages with their names (not just e-mail addresses). Additional information, such as institutional affiliation, might also be of interest to others on the list. (4) When responding to a message on the list, quote only that portion of the message that you are responding to, or enough of the message to remind readers of the context of the discussion. In many cases it is not necessary to quote the entire message. Archives of tc-list are automatically maintained, and they may be accessed by sending a message like the following to majordomo@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu: get tc-list tc-list.yymm where yy is a 2-digit year and mm is a 2-digit month (e.g., tc-list.9604 for April 1996). The first month archived is November 1995 (tc-list.9511). List archives may also be accessed on the Web at http://purl.org/TC/archives/tc-list/tc-list.html. TC messages since 28 Feb 1997 are also archived by Reference.COM at http://www.reference.com. ****************************************************************************** Subscribing, Unsubscribing, and Sending Messages to the List ****************************************************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, send the appropriate message to majordomo@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (_not_ to the list itself): subscribe tc-list [your e-mail address] unsubscribe tc-list [your e-mail address] The e-mail address is optional, since subscription will default to the address you are sending from. You may also subscribe to this list in digest form (i.e., messages bundled and sent out a few times per week) by sending this message to majordomo@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu: subscribe tc-list-digest [your e-mail address] If you subscribe to the digest, be sure to unsubscribe from the list so you won't receive everything twice. To send a message to the list for all to read, send your message to tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu. Don't send to tc-list-digest, even if you're subscribed to the digest. Just send to tc-list. If you do not want to receive messages for a while (e.g., you're going on vacation or will be away from your computer for an extended time), please unsubscribe from the list. There is no "vacation" command on this list. When you want to start receiving messages again, simply subscribe to the list again. ***************************************************************************** TC: A Journal of Biblical Textual Criticism ***************************************************************************** One of the benefits of increasingly widespread Internet access is the ease with which scholars in a particular field can communicate with one another. Although the sciences have dominated the electronic journal field up until this point, several journals in the humanities are now available online. TC follows in the (brief) tradition of the Journal of Buddhist Ethics, the International Journal of Tantric Studies, and the Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies. As far as we are aware, TC is the first Web journal in the area of biblical studies. Why "biblical" textual criticism (rather than t-c of the NT or the Hebrew Bible/OT)? It is time for textual critics in the two camps to communicate more with one another. Textual critics in one field can only benefit by hearing what those in the other field have to say. The journal will accept papers dealing with any aspect of textual criticism of the OT/Hebrew Bible or NT, and it especially encourages "crossover" papers that deal with both areas. Papers dealing either with specific cruxes or with larger issues (methodology, use of versional evidence, etc.) are welcome. Brief notes or full-length articles are equally acceptable. Why an electronic journal? The fact of the matter is that printing a journal costs a lot of money (especially with recent increases in paper prices). In addition, it is debatable whether the field of textual criticism could generate a large enough base to support a paper journal. There are technical difficulties with displaying non-Latin characters that will have to be addressed, but some of these difficulties have already been overcome. With an electronic journal, scholars and students around the world can have free access to one or another form of the journal, either via the World Wide Web, FTP, or e-mail. TC is now in its second year of operation, and we are looking for articles. Please submit your articles in electronic form to: Jimmy Adair Scholars Press P.O. Box 15399 Atlanta, GA 30333-0399 USA You are also welcome to send articles via e-mail to jadair@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu, or you may upload your articles directly to our FTP site at ftp://shemesh.scholar.emory.edu/uploads/TC. TC has a home page on TELA, the Scholars Press World Wide Web site (http://purl.org/TC), and interested parties can look at this page for announcements. We look forward to your participation in TC and tc-list! The list-owner of tc-list is Jimmy Adair (jadair@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu). From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 05:33:23 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id FAA22609; Tue, 4 May 1999 05:33:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199905040938.KAA08813@haymarket.ed.ac.uk> From: "Professor L.W. Hurtado" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 10:32:31 +000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: tc-list congratulations! Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 671 Congratulations to David Taylor (editor) and to David Parker (series co-editor) on the beautifully produced volume of selected papers from the 1997 Birmingham conference on NT textual criticism: D.G.K. Taylor, _Studies in the Early Text of the Gospels & Acts_ (Texts and Studies, 3rd series, #1; Birmingham: Univ. of Birmingham Press, 1999). IT also marks the "resurrection" of the Texts and Studies series, a grand tradition of publishing that has received a worthy heir in this volume. Larry Hurtado L. W. Hurtado University of Edinburgh, New College Mound Place Edinburgh, Scotland EH1 2LX Phone: 0131-650-8920 Fax: 0131-650-6579 E-mail: L.Hurtado@ed.ac.uk From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 06:14:10 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA22698; Tue, 4 May 1999 06:14:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 06:19:08 -0400 From: Mike Bossingham Subject: tc-list Darlow and Moule To: tc list Message-ID: <199905040619_MC2-7459-ED52@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 269 Hi, On Saturday I visited a 2nd hand bookshop and saw a full set of Darlow and Moule for sale. It was the Kraus reprint and it was priced at 450 pounds sterling!! It was in mint condition. Is that a reasonable price? Every Blessing Mike Bossingham. Maidenhead, UK. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 06:57:27 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA22776; Tue, 4 May 1999 06:57:26 -0400 Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 07:02:36 -0400 From: "Harold P. Scanlin" Subject: tc-list Darlow and Moule To: "INTERNET:tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu" Message-ID: <199905040702_MC2-7461-72E8@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 774 Mike Bossingham asked: > = > On Saturday I visited a 2nd hand bookshop and > saw a full set of Darlow and Moule for sale. It was > the Kraus reprint and it was priced at 450 pounds > sterling!! It was in mint condition. > = > Is that a reasonable price? 450 Pounds sounds rather high to me, but it is scarce, even in the Kraus reprint. You may be able to get a better price (I think it was in the neighborhood of US $300) on another, more recent, reprint from: Stroud Theological Booksellers Star Rt., Box 94 Williamsburg, WV 24991 304-645-7169 304-645-4620 fax I think he also is listed with one of the used book dealer Internet sites= , but I do not know the URL. Harold P. Scanlin United Bible Societies 1865 Broadway New York, NY 10023 scanlin@compuserve.com From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 08:29:41 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA23004; Tue, 4 May 1999 08:29:40 -0400 From: dd-1@juno.com To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 07:34:01 -0500 Subject: tc-list Josephus on-line Message-ID: <19990504.073402.-892455.0.DD-1@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Att: 0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 374 Denny Diehl here with a request: Does anyone have www addresses for Josephus that they would post to the List? Thank you! ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 09:30:06 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA23839; Tue, 4 May 1999 09:30:05 -0400 Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 09:34:11 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Josephus on-line X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990504133411.0067f3fc@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 406 At 07:34 AM 5/4/99 -0500, you wrote: >Denny Diehl here with a request: > >Does anyone have www addresses for >Josephus that they would post to the List? http://wesley.nnc.edu/josephus/ jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD Petros Baptist Church- Pastor Quartz Hill School of Theology- Adjunct Prof. of Bible fax- 978-231-5986 email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 10:03:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA02479; Tue, 4 May 1999 10:03:58 -0400 From: "Mark Goodacre" Organization: The University of Birmingham To: dd-1@juno.com, tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 15:09:06 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: tc-list Josephus on-line Priority: normal In-reply-to: <19990504.073402.-892455.0.DD-1@juno.com> Message-ID: <6F51554A6B@hhs.bham.ac.uk> Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 728 On 4 May 99 at 7:34, dd-1@juno.com wrote: > Does anyone have www addresses for > Josephus that they would post to the List? As well as the URL posted by Jim West, see: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre/judaica.htm for annotated links to the Josephus Home Page (Goldberg), Josephus in Greek (Perseus) and Josephus Bibliography (Muenster). Mark -------------------------------------- Dr Mark Goodacre mailto:M.S.Goodacre@bham.ac.uk Dept of Theology tel: +44 121 414 7512 University of Birmingham fax: +44 121 414 6866 Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/goodacre Aseneth Home Page Recommended New Testament Web Resources Mark Without Q From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 14:22:50 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA15079; Tue, 4 May 1999 14:22:49 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990504192811.007fd970@gpo.iol.ie> X-Sender: mauros@gpo.iol.ie X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 19:28:11 +0100 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Maurice A. O'Sullivan" Subject: Re: tc-list Darlow and Moule Cc: scanlin@compuserve.com.MikeBossingham@compuserve.com In-Reply-To: <199905040702_MC2-7461-72E8@compuserve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1459 At 07:02 04/05/99 -0400, you wrote: >Mike Bossingham asked: >> >> On Saturday I visited a 2nd hand bookshop and >> saw a full set of Darlow and Moule for sale. It was >> the Kraus reprint and it was priced at 450 pounds >> sterling!! It was in mint condition. >> >> Is that a reasonable price? > >450 Pounds sounds rather high to me, but it is scarce, even in the Kraus >reprint. You may be able to get a better price (I think it was in the >neighborhood of US $300) on another, more recent, reprint from: > >Stroud Theological Booksellers >Star Rt., Box 94 >Williamsburg, WV 24991 > >304-645-7169 >304-645-4620 fax > >I think he also is listed with one of the used book dealer Internet sites, >but I do not know the URL. The URL you will find useful is that of the MX Bookfinder site, at:http://www.mxbf.com/ where the volume in question is listed under: Advanced Book Exchange Once at USD 250 Twice 225 Once 200 Under Bibliofind, 1 at 250 1 225 1 300 Under Bibliocity 2 x 225 2 x 250 1 x 300 Plenty of choice, there. I can see from the listings why the price is so high; only 250 copies of one edition BTW, at today's exchange rate, the bookseller Mike visited is asking for USD 720 -- which, as the old song title has it, is nice work if you can get it Regards, Maurice Maurice A. O'Sullivan [Bray, Ireland ] "Be certain your feet are planted in the right place before you decide to stand firm!" From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 15:49:53 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA16079; Tue, 4 May 1999 15:49:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199905041951.MAA16812@mail-01.telis.org> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 13:08:48 -0700 Subject: Re: tc-list Darlow and Moule From: "Dexter Garnier" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1103 M. Bossingham wrote: > > On Saturday I visited a 2nd hand bookshop and > saw a full set of Darlow and Moule for sale. It was > the Kraus reprint and it was priced at 450 pounds > sterling!! It was in mint condition. > > Is that a reasonable price? > > Every Blessing > > Mike Bossingham. > Maidenhead, UK. > Rulon-Miller seems to have a later edition set at $200.00: DARLOW, T.H., and H.F. Moule, editors. Historical catalogue of the printed editions of Holy Scripture in the library of the British Foreign Bible Society. In two volumes. Cambridge: M. Martino, [1993]. Re-print edition in 4 volumes of the original edition of London, 1903-11, new in red cloth, gilt. Volume I: English; volumes II, III and IV Polyglots and languages other than English. Limited to 350 sets. The standard reference on editions of the Bible printed in all languages. Book# 12061 US$ 200.00 > Hi, Rulon-Miller Books (ABAA / ILAB) , 400 Summit Avenue , Saint Paul , MN , U.S.A. , 55102 Phone 800-441-0076 / Fax 651-290-0646 , Email rulon@winternet.com Dexter Garnier San Francisco, CA 94114 email: sohncom@telis.org From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 4 18:13:55 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA17008; Tue, 4 May 1999 18:13:54 -0400 Message-ID: <372F720E.A9C27FB3@ao.net> Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 18:17:50 -0400 From: Fred P Miller X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Josephus on-line References: <19990504.073402.-892455.0.DD-1@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 574 find complete works of Josephus here: http://wesley.nnc.edu:80/josephus/ dd-1@juno.com wrote: > Denny Diehl here with a request: > > Does anyone have www addresses for > Josephus that they would post to the List? > > Thank you! > ___________________________________________________________________ > You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. > Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html > or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] -- Fred P Miller For Bible Study Majoring in Isaiah Http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 5 13:02:33 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA24012; Wed, 5 May 1999 13:02:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 13:07:35 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990505170735.0066b51c@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 769 P. Comfort's new book, "The Complete Text of the Earliest NT Manuscripts" has arrived and it is really a tremendous thing! mss include p1 - 104 (with some lacunae), and some other early uncials. The book offers the mss in P order. Some photos are included as well as a fine introduction. 649 pp. of great resources for the textual critic and NT scholar. The transcriptions are really excellent and are exact!, including abbreviations within the papyri themselves. Thought some of you would like to know that this book is now available. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD Petros Baptist Church- Pastor Quartz Hill School of Theology- Adjunct Prof. of Bible fax- 978-231-5986 email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 5 17:15:20 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA25921; Wed, 5 May 1999 17:15:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199905052119.XAA04387@carno.brus.online.be> Subject: tc-list Muller-Kessler &Sokoloff CCPA Date: Mer, 5 Mai 99 23:23:31 +0200 x-sender: vale5655@pop3.brus.online.be x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: Jean Valentin To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1383 Dear list members, I would like to know if some of you have read reviews of the new = edition of Syropalestinian biblical texts by Muller-Kessler and = Sokoloff - or if some among you that use it have an opinion to share = about it. The only thing I regret about those volumes is that finding = a definite text is not an easy task. The indexes give the repartition = of the texts in the manuscripts, and the mss are edited separately - = which, I think, is a good idea - but no index (except if I haven't = found the right way to do it) allows to quickly find all occurrences = of a given passage in the volumes. On the other hand it's not so = great a handicap, as there are not so many fragments after all. I have the two NT volumes since a week now and am quite impressed. A = technical question that I have is about the special font used for the = syropalestinian text in those volumes. It imitates quite well the = script. Is it a known, available font? Thanks for your help, Jean V. _______________________________________________________________ Jean Valentin - 34 rue du Berceau - 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique tel. 32-2-280.01.37 e-mail : jgvalentin@arcadis.be _______________________________________________________________ "Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop compliqu=E9 est = inutilisable" _______________________________________________________________ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 5 17:15:23 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA25931; Wed, 5 May 1999 17:15:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199905052119.XAA04390@carno.brus.online.be> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Date: Mer, 5 Mai 99 23:23:34 +0200 x-sender: vale5655@pop3.brus.online.be x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: Jean Valentin To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 628 >P. Comfort's new book, "The Complete Text of the Earliest NT Manuscripts" >has arrived and it is really a tremendous thing! Dear Jim, Could you give complete references please? Especially publishing = house... Thanks a lot. Jean V. _______________________________________________________________ Jean Valentin - 34 rue du Berceau - 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique tel. 32-2-280.01.37 e-mail : jgvalentin@arcadis.be _______________________________________________________________ "Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop compliqu=E9 est = inutilisable" _______________________________________________________________ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 5 17:31:42 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA26007; Wed, 5 May 1999 17:31:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 17:36:55 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990505213655.00671e2c@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 531 >Dear Jim, > >Could you give complete references please? Especially publishing house... > >Thanks a lot. > >Jean V. The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts, Comfort, Philip W., and David P. Barrett, eds. ISBN: 0-8010-2136-7Price: $49.99cTrim Size: 6 x 9Pages: 656 Baker Book House best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD Petros Baptist Church- Pastor Quartz Hill School of Theology- Adjunct Prof. of Bible fax- 978-231-5986 email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 5 17:33:49 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA26042; Wed, 5 May 1999 17:33:48 -0400 From: dd-1@juno.com To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 16:36:34 -0500 Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Message-ID: <19990505.163634.-794743.1.DD-1@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Att: 0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 638 Denny Diehl here >>P. Comfort's new book, "The Complete Text of the Earliest NT >>Manuscripts" has arrived and it is really a tremendous thing! >Could you give complete references please? Especially publishing >house... The book can be obtained through CBD. The price is $24.95, List $40 something. There was a sale a month ago for $21.95. The address is: www.christianbook.com ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 09:27:10 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA00425; Thu, 6 May 1999 09:27:09 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 08:32:29 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender: ljgrn@bluejay.creighton.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: ljgrn@creighton.edu (Leonard Greenspoon) Subject: Re: tc-list Muller-Kessler &Sokoloff CCPA Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1837 ALLOW me, as TC book review editor, to use this occasion to point out what has been, for me, the most disappointing aspect of my "job." More than a year ago,I sent out for review two volumes in the series commented on below. In spite of my repeated (and, I think, friendly) reminders, no reviews have been forthcomiing..as a result, the value of TC to provide timely reviews of relelvant books is diminished..just a thought, leonard greenspoon >Dear list members, > >I would like to know if some of you have read reviews of the new edition >of Syropalestinian biblical texts by Muller-Kessler and Sokoloff - or if >some among you that use it have an opinion to share about it. The only >thing I regret about those volumes is that finding a definite text is not >an easy task. The indexes give the repartition of the texts in the >manuscripts, and the mss are edited separately - which, I think, is a good >idea - but no index (except if I haven't found the right way to do it) >allows to quickly find all occurrences of a given passage in the volumes. >On the other hand it's not so great a handicap, as there are not so many >fragments after all. > >I have the two NT volumes since a week now and am quite impressed. A >technical question that I have is about the special font used for the >syropalestinian text in those volumes. It imitates quite well the script. >Is it a known, available font? > >Thanks for your help, > >Jean V. > >_______________________________________________________________ >Jean Valentin - 34 rue du Berceau - 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique >tel. 32-2-280.01.37 >e-mail : jgvalentin@arcadis.be >_______________________________________________________________ >"Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop compliqu=E9 est inutilisa= ble" >_______________________________________________________________ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 09:30:58 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA00459; Thu, 6 May 1999 09:30:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 09:30:56 -0400 Message-Id: <199905061330.JAA00454@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> >Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 10:17:50 +0000 From: TOMMY MARKANZIA REKLAM HB To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? Content-Type: text Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1481 Dear subscriber! I - a Swedish student of theology - is presently working on an essay in ethics. Since I am very interested in the area of textual criticism I am trying to connect the areas of scribal tendencies in the textual transmission of NT, and the development or elaboration of christian (orthodox) ethics in the early church. I have read two of Bart D. Ehrman´s essay´s concerning text and tradition in the early church, which show that various concerns in the church (sociological, doctrinal etc) are mirrored in the way scribes transmitted (omitted, amended or changed) the original text. This was indeed interesting for me - the idea of using textual criticism with another aim than just trying to secure the original text. Anyhow, now I am supposed to write an essay in ethics and I would like to ask the subscribers of the list for a piece of good advice. Do You think it would show fruitful to investigate if some textual variants (and if so, where should I look for them in the NT) have bearings on the history of ethics in the early church. The oppression of women, or antisemitism could indeed belong to the subject, but if we define ethics more narrowly to designate moral life of the Christian. Perhaps You have some suggestions for my study of literature. I hope You understand my query, in spite of my poor knowledge in English. I thank You for Your contribution in the research of a subject which I take great interest in. With regards Tommy Wasserman From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 09:42:43 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA00564; Thu, 6 May 1999 09:42:42 -0400 Message-Id: <199905061348.OAA27779@haymarket.ed.ac.uk> From: "Professor L.W. Hurtado" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 14:41:44 +000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? Priority: normal In-reply-to: <199905061330.JAA00454@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 610 In addition to the variants you alluded to (1 Cor 14:34-35 on women; anti-Jewish variants in Codex D) which reflect "ethical" issues, you might also consider the variation in the "apostolic decree" in ACts 15:29. The absence (omission?) of "things strangled" may indicate a list of "moral/ethical" commands (idolatry, murder, fornication), whereas the presence of "things strangled" appears to make the list one of "clean/unclean" concerns. L. W. Hurtado University of Edinburgh, New College Mound Place Edinburgh, Scotland EH1 2LX Phone: 0131-650-8920 Fax: 0131-650-6579 E-mail: L.Hurtado@ed.ac.uk From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 10:04:58 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA00764; Thu, 6 May 1999 10:04:56 -0400 Message-ID: <9063E24E9176D111B0580060083927B950ACE6@smtp.crpc.org> From: "Lamerson, Sam" To: "'tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu'" , "'tommy.wasserman@orebro.mail.telia.com'" Subject: RE: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 10:09:14 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2203 Another perhaps fruitful approach might be to consider the question of = the ethics of scribes who were intentionally changing manuscripts which = they considered to be Scripture. Did the scribes see the ethical problems inherent in intentional changes? Or did they see these changes as = ethically necessary as a result of the problems that the unchanged passage might cause? =20 Just a thought Sam Lamerson Knox Theological Seminary Professor Sam Lamerson Knox Theological Seminary "Where Ministry Comes First!" 1 800 344-KNOX (5669) -------- From: TOMMY MARKANZIA REKLAM HB Sent: May 6, 1999 9:37 AM To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Cc:=09 Subject: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? Dear subscriber! I - a Swedish student of theology - is presently working on an essay in ethics. Since I am very interested in the area of textual criticism I = am trying to connect the areas of scribal tendencies in the textual transmission of NT, and the development or elaboration of christian (orthodox) ethics in the early church. I have read two of Bart D. Ehrman=B4s essay=B4s concerning text and tradition in the early church, which show that various concerns in the church (sociological, doctrinal etc) are mirrored in the way scribes transmitted (omitted, amended or changed) the original text. This was indeed interesting for me - the idea of using textual criticism with another aim than just trying to secure the original text. Anyhow, now I am supposed to write an essay in ethics and I would like to ask the subscribers of the list for a piece of good advice. Do You think it would show fruitful to investigate if some textual variants (and if so, where should I look for them in the NT) have bearings on = the history of ethics in the early church. The oppression of women, or antisemitism could indeed belong to the subject, but if we define = ethics more narrowly to designate moral life of the Christian. Perhaps You = have some suggestions for my study of literature. I hope You understand my query, in spite of my poor knowledge in English. I thank You for Your contribution in the research of a subject which I take great interest in. With regards Tommy Wasserman From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 10:05:52 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA00791; Thu, 6 May 1999 10:05:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 10:05:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199905061405.KAA00786@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> >Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 09:56:08 -0400 From: "Lamerson, Sam" To: "'tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu'" , "'tommy.wasserman@orebro.mail.telia.com'" Subject: RE: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? Content-Type: text Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2080 Another perhaps fruitful approach might be to consider the question of the ethics of scribes who were intentionally changing manuscripts which they considered to be Scripture. Did the scribes see the ethical problems inherent in intentional changes? Or did they see these changes as ethically necessary as a result of the problems that the unchanged passage might cause? Just a thought Sam Lamerson Knox Theological Seminary -------- From: TOMMY MARKANZIA REKLAM HB Sent: May 6, 1999 9:37 AM To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Cc: Subject: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? Dear subscriber! I - a Swedish student of theology - is presently working on an essay in ethics. Since I am very interested in the area of textual criticism I am trying to connect the areas of scribal tendencies in the textual transmission of NT, and the development or elaboration of christian (orthodox) ethics in the early church. I have read two of Bart D. Ehrman´s essay´s concerning text and tradition in the early church, which show that various concerns in the church (sociological, doctrinal etc) are mirrored in the way scribes transmitted (omitted, amended or changed) the original text. This was indeed interesting for me - the idea of using textual criticism with another aim than just trying to secure the original text. Anyhow, now I am supposed to write an essay in ethics and I would like to ask the subscribers of the list for a piece of good advice. Do You think it would show fruitful to investigate if some textual variants (and if so, where should I look for them in the NT) have bearings on the history of ethics in the early church. The oppression of women, or antisemitism could indeed belong to the subject, but if we define ethics more narrowly to designate moral life of the Christian. Perhaps You have some suggestions for my study of literature. I hope You understand my query, in spite of my poor knowledge in English. I thank You for Your contribution in the research of a subject which I take great interest in. With regards Tommy Wasserman From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 11:00:21 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA01378; Thu, 6 May 1999 11:00:19 -0400 From: TonyProst@aol.com Message-ID: <38ae9823.2463097f@aol.com> Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 11:04:31 EDT Subject: Re: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 200 On this issue, you might check the Secret Mark websites, which I am certain someone on this list can refer you to! Regards, Tony Prost All NOnnos All Day http://members.aol.com/tonyprost/index.html From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 12:32:07 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA01936; Thu, 6 May 1999 12:32:06 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 18:37:24 +0200 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu References: <199905061330.JAA00454@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> Subject: Re: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Sender: 320003854441-0001@t-online.de From: U.B.Schmid@t-online.de (Dr. Ulrich Schmid) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 687 To my mind, one of the most complex textual problems involving ethics are the synoptic sayings on marriage and divorce (Mk 10.2-12; Mt 5.27-32; Mt 19.3-9; Lk 16.18). Here you can study the quest for ethical implications of (competing) readings along with the vexing problem of harmonization. In addition, there are very good expositions of the problem extant. I may recommend M.W. Holmes, "The Text of the Matthean Divorce Passages: A Comment on the Appeal to Harmonization in Textual Decisions", in: JBL 109 (1990) 651-64; and D. Parker, The Living Text of the Gospels, Cambridge 1997, pp.57-94. ------------------------------------------ Dr. Ulrich Schmid U.B.Schmid@t-online.de From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 12:38:39 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA01981; Thu, 6 May 1999 12:38:38 -0400 Message-ID: <3731C5DC.9A23FD33@historian.net> Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 11:39:56 -0500 From: Jack Kilmon X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? References: <38ae9823.2463097f@aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 670 TonyProst@aol.com wrote: > On this issue, you might check the Secret Mark websites, which I am certain > someone on this list can refer you to! http://www.globaltown.com/shawn/secmark.html http://www1.bremen.de/~wie/Secret/secmark_home.html http://home.sol.no/~noetic/secm.htm http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Trowbridge/secmark.htm http://www.trends.net/~yuku/bbl/8secmk.htm http://members.xoom.com/jesusquest/ http://osf1.gmu.edu/~herwin/mark.htm http://www.historian.net/secmark.htm Jack -- ______________________________________________ taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon Jack Kilmon jkilmon@historian.net http://www.historian.net From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 13:00:22 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA02622; Thu, 6 May 1999 13:00:20 -0400 Message-ID: <3731CB06.ECF0FCE2@historian.net> Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 12:01:58 -0500 From: Jack Kilmon X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? References: <38ae9823.2463097f@aol.com> <3731C5DC.9A23FD33@historian.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------C013713433B408F693FE70ED" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3014 --------------C013713433B408F693FE70ED Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jack Kilmon wrote: > TonyProst@aol.com wrote: > > > On this issue, you might check the Secret Mark websites, which I am certain > > someone on this list can refer you to! > > http://www.globaltown.com/shawn/secmark.html > > http://www1.bremen.de/~wie/Secret/secmark_home.html Messed this one up. Should be http://www1.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Secret/secmark.home.html > > > http://home.sol.no/~noetic/secm.htm > > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Trowbridge/secmark.htm > > http://www.trends.net/~yuku/bbl/8secmk.htm > > http://members.xoom.com/jesusquest/ > > http://osf1.gmu.edu/~herwin/mark.htm and this one: http://osf1.gmu.edu/~herwin/mark.html > > > http://www.historian.net/secmark.htm > Sorry bout dat Jack -- ______________________________________________ taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon Jack Kilmon jkilmon@historian.net http://www.historian.net --------------C013713433B408F693FE70ED Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit  

Jack Kilmon wrote:

TonyProst@aol.com wrote:

> On this issue, you might check the Secret Mark websites, which I am certain
> someone on this list can refer you to!

http://www.globaltown.com/shawn/secmark.html

http://www1.bremen.de/~wie/Secret/secmark_home.html

Messed this one up. Should be
http://www1.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Secret/secmark.home.html
 

http://home.sol.no/~noetic/secm.htm

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Trowbridge/secmark.htm

http://www.trends.net/~yuku/bbl/8secmk.htm

http://members.xoom.com/jesusquest/

http://osf1.gmu.edu/~herwin/mark.htm

and this one:
http://osf1.gmu.edu/~herwin/mark.html
 

http://www.historian.net/secmark.htm
 

Sorry bout dat

Jack
--
______________________________________________

taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon

Jack Kilmon
jkilmon@historian.net

http://www.historian.net
  --------------C013713433B408F693FE70ED-- From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 17:12:03 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA05588; Thu, 6 May 1999 17:12:02 -0400 Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 17:16:44 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: tc-list coptic X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990506211644.00671244@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 365 Listers, a few weeks ago I inquired about a Coptic version of the Bible. To date, I have been unable to find one. Anyone have a clue? Thanks, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD Petros Baptist Church- Pastor Quartz Hill School of Theology- Adjunct Prof. of Bible fax- 978-231-5986 email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 20:14:19 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA06188; Thu, 6 May 1999 20:14:18 -0400 Message-ID: <37323193.E9B379C8@flash.net> Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 19:19:31 -0500 From: Andrew Payne Organization: FamilyFirst Ministries X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Scribal tendencies - Christian Ethics? References: <199905061330.JAA00454@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------3502B982AC7C84744D5F891F" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2504 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------3502B982AC7C84744D5F891F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ares.flash.net id TAA12879 YOu mentioned two of Bart Ehrman's essays, have your read his An Orthodox Corruption of Scripture? TOMMY MARKANZIA REKLAM HB wrote: > Dear subscriber! > > I - a Swedish student of theology - is presently working on an essay in > ethics. Since I am very interested in the area of textual criticism I a= m > trying to connect the areas of scribal tendencies in the textual > transmission of NT, and the development or elaboration of christian > (orthodox) ethics in the early church. > > I have read two of Bart D. Ehrman=B4s essay=B4s concerning text and > tradition in the early church, which show that various concerns in the > church (sociological, doctrinal etc) are mirrored in the way scribes > transmitted (omitted, amended or changed) the original text. This was > indeed interesting for me - the idea of using textual criticism with > another aim than just trying to secure the original text. > > Anyhow, now I am supposed to write an essay in ethics and I would like > to ask the subscribers of the list for a piece of good advice. Do You > think it would show fruitful to investigate if some textual variants > (and if so, where should I look for them in the NT) have bearings on th= e > history of ethics in the early church. The oppression of women, or > antisemitism could indeed belong to the subject, but if we define ethic= s > more narrowly to designate moral life of the Christian. Perhaps You hav= e > some suggestions for my study of literature. > > I hope You understand my query, in spite of my poor knowledge in > English. I thank You for Your contribution in the research of a subject > which I take great interest in. > > With regards > > Tommy Wasserman --------------3502B982AC7C84744D5F891F Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="andrew11.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Andrew Payne Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="andrew11.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin:vcard n:Payne;Andrew x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:andrew11@flash.net note;quoted-printable:"Even if you are on the right track,=0D=0Ayou'll get run over if you just sit there."=0D=0A Mark Twain fn:Andrew end:vcard --------------3502B982AC7C84744D5F891F-- From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 20:20:24 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA06218; Thu, 6 May 1999 20:20:23 -0400 Message-ID: <37323301.F1EA25ED@flash.net> Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 19:25:37 -0500 From: Andrew Payne Organization: FamilyFirst Ministries X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list Subject: tc-list Synoptic Gospels Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------ADEA1CD64D55CDFC9A5D527D" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 927 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------ADEA1CD64D55CDFC9A5D527D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Andrew Payne here. I know that this is off topic and I apologize beforehand for this, but... I was looking for the website for the Synoptic Gospel list. Can anyone help me? Thanks, Andrew Payne --------------ADEA1CD64D55CDFC9A5D527D Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="andrew11.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Andrew Payne Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="andrew11.vcf" begin:vcard n:Payne;Andrew x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:andrew11@flash.net note;quoted-printable:"Even if you are on the right track,=0D=0Ayou'll get run over if you just sit there."=0D=0A Mark Twain fn:Andrew end:vcard --------------ADEA1CD64D55CDFC9A5D527D-- From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 6 20:31:02 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA06262; Thu, 6 May 1999 20:31:01 -0400 Message-ID: <37323452.A9010FF2@mailhost.chi.ameritech.net> Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 19:31:14 -0500 From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu, Andrew Payne Subject: Re: tc-list Synoptic Gospels References: <37323301.F1EA25ED@flash.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 396 Andrew Payne wrote: > Hi, > > Andrew Payne here. > I know that this is off topic and I apologize beforehand for this, > but... > I was looking for the website for the Synoptic Gospel list. Can anyone > help me? > Go to: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l/ Yours, Jeffrey Gibson -- Jeffrey B. Gibson 7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A Chicago, Illinois 60626 e-mail jgibson000@ameritech.net From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 7 12:49:06 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA11071; Fri, 7 May 1999 12:49:05 -0400 From: "Thomas J. Kraus" Organization: Universitaet Regensburg To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 15:40:43 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: Quoted-printable Subject: tc-list Re: Comfort's book Cc: thomas-juergen.kraus@theologie.uni-regensburg.de Priority: normal In-reply-to: <199904211310.JAA17612@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.54) Message-ID: <37C8A085BDD@alf3.ngate.uni-regensburg.de> Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 769 Jim West mentioned Comfort=B4s and Barrett=B4s Book ("Complete Text of the= Earliest New Testament Manuscripts"). Amazon.com showed up with a "not yet= published" note. Any information how/where to get it? Does it make any reference to the papyrus fragment from Qumran (7Q5) as a witness for Mark=B4s Gospel (???)? Does it include the recent Oxyrhynchos papyri providing some fifth to seventh copies of Matthew? How is the script given (new font with critical notes; abbreviations, nomina sacra, comments)? Any help? Best wishes, Thomas J. Kraus Universitaet Regensburg Kath.-theol. Fakultaet Universitaetsstr. 31 D-93053 Regensburg Federal Republic of Germany Tel. + 49 941 943 36 90 Fax. + 49 941 943 19 86 thomas-juergen.kraus@theologie.uni-regensburg.de From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 7 13:03:47 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA11207; Fri, 7 May 1999 13:03:46 -0400 Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 13:08:49 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Re: Comfort's book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990507170849.006653a0@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1079 At 03:40 PM 5/7/99 +0200, you wrote: >Jim West mentioned Comfort=B4s and Barrett=B4s Book ("Complete Text of the= =20 >Earliest New Testament Manuscripts"). Amazon.com showed up with a "not yet= =20 >published" note. Any information how/where to get it? I got mine directly from Baker. They have a web site- www.bakerbooks.com >Does it make any reference to the papyrus fragment from Qumran (7Q5) as a= =20 >witness for Mark=B4s Gospel (???)? No- because it isnt. > Does it include the recent Oxyrhynchos=20 >papyri providing some fifth to seventh copies of Matthew? How is the=20 >script given (new font with critical notes; abbreviations, nomina sacra,=20 >comments)? Yes, abbreviations, etc. Its a transcription, though in miniscule font as you will find in your GNT rather than uncial script. >Any help? >Best wishes, > I dunno. I hope so. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD Petros Baptist Church- Pastor Quartz Hill School of Theology- Adjunct Prof. of Bible fax- 978-231-5986 email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 7 13:05:15 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA11231; Fri, 7 May 1999 13:05:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199905071710.NAA25802@pike.sover.net> Comments: SoVerNet Verification (on pike.sover.net) newdell from st232.virt.sover.net [207.136.205.232] 207.136.205.232 Fri, 7 May 1999 13:10:41 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: nichael@sover.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 13:14:54 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: Nichael Lynn Cramer Subject: Re: tc-list Re: Comfort's book Cc: thomas-juergen.kraus@theologie.uni-regensburg.de In-Reply-To: <37C8A085BDD@alf3.ngate.uni-regensburg.de> References: <199904211310.JAA17612@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1100 Thomas J. Kraus wrote: >Jim West mentioned Comfort=B4s and Barrett=B4s Book ("Complete Text of the= =20 >Earliest New Testament Manuscripts"). Amazon.com showed up with a "not yet= =20 >published" note. Any information how/where to get it? Note: Although they also list it as "not yet available" CBD offers the book at $24.95 (i.e. less than 50% of the list price of $49.99). >Does it make any reference to the papyrus fragment from Qumran (7Q5) as a= =20 >witness for Mark=B4s Gospel (???)? Does it include the recent Oxyrhynchos= =20 >papyri providing some fifth to seventh copies of Matthew? How is the=20 >script given (new font with critical notes; abbreviations, nomina sacra,=20 >comments)? A couple of other question: =20 How are uncertain readings, conjectural readings, scribal corrections, etc, indicated? Whose "transcriptions" are used in the books (Comfort's or those of someone else)? Are varying transcription/readings by other editors included? Thanks Nichael --- Nichael Cramer nichael@sover.net nulla dies sine linea http://www.sover.net/~nichael/ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 7 13:19:42 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA11316; Fri, 7 May 1999 13:19:41 -0400 Message-ID: <373321A5.BBC16157@ao.net> Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 13:23:49 -0400 From: Fred P Miller X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list coptic References: <199904211310.JAA17612@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> <199905071710.NAA25802@pike.sover.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 698 RE: Coptic Bible The Lamsa foundation senrt me this message: "Robert E. Allen, Jr." Reply-To: aramaic.bible.society@aramaic.org Organization: The Aramaic Bible Society, Inc. To: Fred P Miller References: 1 Dear Fred: There may well be a copy of one here in a few weeks. We have been promised one! I will file this and tell you about it when I have it in hand. But remind me a month from now. O.K. Best regards, Bob Allen if interested write to them directly. FPM -- Fred P Miller For Bible Study Majoring in Isaiah Http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 7 13:21:47 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA11338; Fri, 7 May 1999 13:21:46 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990507182651.008b2750@gpo.iol.ie> X-Sender: mauros@gpo.iol.ie X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 18:26:51 +0100 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Maurice A. O'Sullivan" Subject: Re: tc-list Re: Comfort's book In-Reply-To: <37C8A085BDD@alf3.ngate.uni-regensburg.de> References: <199904211310.JAA17612@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by mail.iol.ie id SAA68295 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 592 At 15:40 07/05/99 +0200, you wrote: >Jim West mentioned Comfort=B4s and Barrett=B4s Book ("Complete Text of t= he=20 >Earliest New Testament Manuscripts"). Amazon.com showed up with a "not y= et=20 >published" note. Any information how/where to get it? Go to: http://www.bakersdzn.com/index.shtml Enter the title in the search box, and search. Tick the "Book Watch" box to the left of the title. Click on "Save Orders" You will be asked to enter your e-mail address, do so, and they promise t= o send you news. Regards, Maurice Maurice A. O'Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ] mauros@iol.ie From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 8 10:28:35 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA15857; Sat, 8 May 1999 10:28:33 -0400 Message-ID: <37344B4F.6B8D031A@flash.net> Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 09:33:52 -0500 From: Andrew Payne Organization: FamilyFirst Ministries X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Re: Comfort's book References: <37C8A085BDD@alf3.ngate.uni-regensburg.de> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------F2975CEF1536D960497FA9B9" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1724 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------F2975CEF1536D960497FA9B9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ares.flash.net id JAA21793 It is also in the new CBD catalog, or at www.christianbooks.com "Thomas J. Kraus" wrote: > Jim West mentioned Comfort=B4s and Barrett=B4s Book ("Complete Text of = the > Earliest New Testament Manuscripts"). Amazon.com showed up with a "not = yet > published" note. Any information how/where to get it? > Does it make any reference to the papyrus fragment from Qumran (7Q5) as= a > witness for Mark=B4s Gospel (???)? Does it include the recent Oxyrhynch= os > papyri providing some fifth to seventh copies of Matthew? How is the > script given (new font with critical notes; abbreviations, nomina sacra= , > comments)? > Any help? > Best wishes, > > Thomas J. Kraus > > Universitaet Regensburg > Kath.-theol. Fakultaet > Universitaetsstr. 31 > D-93053 Regensburg > Federal Republic of Germany > > Tel. + 49 941 943 36 90 > Fax. + 49 941 943 19 86 > thomas-juergen.kraus@theologie.uni-regensburg.de --------------F2975CEF1536D960497FA9B9 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="andrew11.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Andrew Payne Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="andrew11.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin:vcard n:Payne;Andrew x-mozilla-html:FALSE adr:;;;;;; version:2.1 email;internet:andrew11@flash.net note;quoted-printable:"Even if you are on the right track,=0D=0Ayou'll get run over if you just sit there."=0D=0A Mark Twain fn:Andrew end:vcard --------------F2975CEF1536D960497FA9B9-- From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 10 10:42:10 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA24457; Mon, 10 May 1999 10:42:08 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 10:42:06 -0400 From: tpryde@ix.netcom.com Message-Id: <199905101442.KAA24452@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> >Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 07:10:32 -0000 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list coptic Content-Type: text Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 478 <373321a5.bbc1615-@ao.net> wrote: Original Article: http://www.egroups.com/list/tc-list/?start=5985 > RE: Coptic Bible I understand the Packard Humanities Institute has a cd rom with a coptic text available. I haven't contacted them, but here is their information. Packard Humanities Institute 300 Second Street, Suite 201 Los Altos, CA 94022 e-mail: PHI@ccnet.com tel: +1 (650) 948-0150 fax: +1 (650) 948-4135 Thomas Pryde III From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 10 14:37:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA28744; Mon, 10 May 1999 14:37:58 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 14:42:08 -0400 From: "Harold P. Scanlin" Subject: Re: tc-list Mueller CPA To: "INTERNET:tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu" Message-ID: <199905101442_MC2-752D-CCD6@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 5461 I completed this short review several months ago, but due to a slip up, probably on my part, it never found its way into e-print. I have not see= n the NT volumes, but it would be reasonable to assume that the general editorial principles are uniform for both OT and NT volumes. I know nothing about the availability of the font. _________________________________________ = M=FCller-Kessler, Christa and Michael Sokoloff, editors. The Christian Palestinian Aramaic Old Testament and Apocrypha version from the early period. (A Corpus of Christian Palestinian Aramaic, 1). Groningen: Styx= , 1997. M=FCller-Kessler previously published an important grammar of the languag= e she calls Christian Palestinian Aramaic (CPA), but has also been called Syropalestinian (by Goshen-Gottstein and others), Palestinian Syriac (Agnes Smith Lewis), or Christian Palestinian Syriac (Matthew Black). It= was the discovery by Lewis of several important biblical manuscripts at the end of the 19th century that launched the modern era of interest in t= he biblical witnesses written in this ancient language. M=FCller-Kessler and= Sokoloff prefer the name Christian Palestinian Aramaic which helps to distinguish it from "standard" Syriac. This is a useful linguistic distinction which also helps to focus on the fact that this translation into CPA is different than the better known Syriac translations. Even though the CPA version is chronologically earlier than the Syriac version(s), it is translated from the Septuagint, and rarely, if ever, is= an independent witness for a Hebrew reading. Thus, its primary value lie= s in the textual criticism of the OG. Even though Goshen-Gottstein support= s the essential character of CPA as a daughter version of the OG, he, nevertheless, believes that "the translators from the Greek seem to have availed themselves sometimes of certain current Targumic traditions. On the other hand, . . . secondary influences by the Peshitta cannot be rule= d out (VIII)." The intention of the volume under review, however, is not to enter into discussions of textual criticism, but to offer a corpus of all known OT texts "from the early period." For this purpose the editors have admirab= ly succeeded in providing the interested scholar with a reliable resource. = The texts are presented diplomatically, including the preservation of the= columnar arrangement and line length of the originals. The texts are printed in a CPA orthography which resembles, but is not identical to, Estrangelo. It should be remembered that the Cairo Geniza CPA manuscript= s were written in the Aramaic square script, but are here transcribed into the same script used throughout the entire volume. The editors point out= that their new edition has reexamined the manuscripts themselves, enablin= g them to offer better, and especially in the case of the several palimpses= t manuscripts, previously undeciphered readings. This reviewer is not in a= position to judge the accuracy of these new readings without examining th= e manuscripts themselves, although a few palimpsest manuscripts are include= d in the selection of twenty plates included in the volume. On the other hand, it is quite likely that the editors offer superior readings. The primary interest of the editors seems to be linguistic, rather than textual, borne out by the fact that the corpus intentionally includes "on= ly the texts from the earlier stage of the language (5th - 8th cents. C.E.)= since this stratum of the language may differ considerably from the later= stage and is also more important for our knowledge of the LXX Bible (3)."= = Conceding the possibility of (significant) linguistic development of CPA,= the editors offer no specific evidence. From a diachronic study of the development of this Aramaic dialect, limiting the corpus to the early period may be useful, but for those looking for a collection of all textu= al witnesses the editors' choice becomes rather arbitrary. Again, conceding= that earlier manuscripts are probably more interesting textually, the CPA= tradition is limited both in quantity and in textual development, so that= consideration of the textual tradition will need to look beyond this otherwise valuable collection to get a more complete perspective. We do have Goshen-Gottstein's The Bible in the Syropalestinain Version, Part I,= Pentateuch and Prophets (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1973), and the publication of= voulme 2 has now been announced by the publisher as forthcoming. Another= important manuscript of the Horologion containing many Psalm texts hither= to unknown in CPA, as well as other biblical quotations, has been admirably edited by Matthew Black in A Christian Palestinian Syriac Horologion (Cambridge: University Press, 1954). It is worth noting that Black believes that the Biblical text was translated from a Lucianic type of Greek text, with the Peshitta used as a help to the translators. Within the chronological limits set by the editors themselves, this volum= e should become the standard edition for CPA Old Testament and Apocrypha. = In addition to the presentation of the texts themselves, the editors provide= a brief five page commentary, dealing primarily with linguistic issues, but= they do note a plus in Jer. _______________________________________________ Harold P. Scanlin United Bible Societies 1865 Broadway New York, NY 10023 scanlin@compuserve.com From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 10 14:38:04 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA28761; Mon, 10 May 1999 14:38:03 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 14:42:19 -0400 From: "Harold P. Scanlin" Subject: Re: tc-list coptic To: "INTERNET:tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu" Message-ID: <199905101443_MC2-752D-CCD9@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 410 There is a Coptic CD available from the "St. Shenouda the Archimandrite Coptic Society" with the text of the NT in both bohairic and Sahidic, as well as the surviving fragments from other Coptic versions. For more information and to order the CD online, go to: http://www.stshenouda.com/society/copticcd.htm Harold P. Scanlin United Bible Societies 1865 Broadway New York, NY 10023 scanlin@compuserve.com From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 18 20:43:45 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA15783; Tue, 18 May 1999 20:43:45 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list A Caution regarding Comfort and Barrett Message-ID: <19990518.204323.4495.1.seventh.guardian@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-28,30-94,96-106,108-110,112-113,115-181,183-192, 194-248,250,252-268 From: M A Robinson Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 20:48:50 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 12183 Disclaimer: This is not a review; only a cautionary warning. =============================================================== Don't Kill The Messenger: This Book Has Problems! Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett, eds., _The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts_ (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999). 652pp. Preliminary Observations by Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D. I recently received from Baker Book House a review copy of Comfort and Barrett's _The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts_ (hereafter C/B). I am in process of examining this volume in preparation for a brief review which will appear in our seminary's _Faith and Mission_ journal. Certain matters (for which I have little room within the page limits of that review) appear so serious and disturbing, however, that they must be reported to the tc-list. These problems virtually nullify any value or service this volume might have rendered to those engaged in detailed NT text-critical research or who may have desired to utilize it as a classroom text or as a significant resource for text-critical investigations in the absence of the original photographs or _editio princeps_ of a given MS. Although I have numerous matters of concern, I will focus on that which is the most serious: the text of the early papyri and vellum fragments as reproduced by Comfort and Barrett is significantly inaccurate, containing far too many errors, whether typographical, caused by misreading, or otherwise without explanation. To offer a sampling of such examples: EXAMPLE 1: MS 0189 (Ac 5:3-21) ================== MS 0189 (C/B transcription versus reproduced photo of verso from _ZNW_ 26 [1927] 113); one should consult the original photo if possible, since it is much brighter and clearer): photo line 1: clearly shows Ac 5:12 reading PANTES EN TH STOA C/B transcription reads PANTES TH STOA photo line 2: clearly reads OUQEIS C/B transcription reads OUDEIS photo line 22: the Q of Q[URAS] is plainly and entirely visible, yet C/B report [QURAS] as wholly unreadable. photo line 24: line clearly ends LALEI with [TE] continuing next line in lacuna; C/B report line ends LAL with [EITE] in reconstruction of next line. photo line 29: ARCIEREUS clearly has KAI following on same line, yet C/B transcription shows ARCIEREUS ending the line, with [KAI] in lacuna at beginning of next line. For the recto portion of MS 0189 (where the photo was absent), I compared C/B with the Salonius transcription in ZNW. Giving Salonius the benefit of the doubt (confirmed at points by Nestle/Aland) specifically because of the already-demonstrated errors in C/B, I find the following problems on the recto of the same MS: line 8: Salonius reads the nomen sacrum ANOIS without a lacuna; C/B read ANQ[RWPOIS] _with_ a lacuna. Someone errs at this point. line 12: Salonius reads ANASTANTES DE, but C/B omits the DE entirely. line 17: Salonius reads [A]YTHN P[ETROS], clearly not having the article before the proper name; this confirmed by Nestle/Aland. C/B however, read AUTH[N PE]TROS which, if correct, would leave the question of the presence or absence of the article in doubt; yet Nestle-Aland states this reading with certainty and not as _vid_. lines 17/18: C/B reconstruct as EITOS/OUTOU TO XWRION with no lacuna. Salonius gives only EI]/TO XWRION, and comments in his note "TOSOUTOU vor TO XWRION versehentlich weggelassen, weil in der Antwort vorhanden." Even if TOSOUTOU were present, the line division given by C/B seems impossible in light of Salonius' transcription. line 23: Salonius reads the apparent scribal blunder EPESON, while C/B read a partial lacuna EPE]SEN, not catching the blunder. Yet Salonius specifically notes this in his apparatus: "EPESON (Schrieibf[ehler] statt -SEN)." line 24: instead of what Salonius reports as a correct EXE[YUXEN], C/B have the blunder EKE[YUXEN] sic. There is no comment in Salonius' apparatus, so the correct spelling is assumed to be original. line 30: Salonius has DIA T[E TWN...], while C/B read DIA T[WN...], leaving the line noticeably short. Salonius also has no note here regarding a short line, so the longer reconstruction seems more likely original.. line 31: C/B have two left brackets in a phrase ending a line: ...NONTO [SHMEIA KAI [TER, only one of which can be correct, since C/B do not include closing brackets at the end of a line unless the whole line is missing.. Beyond these problems, the matter of where to place brackets to indicate lacunae differs in MS 0189 between the transcription of C/B and that of Salonius by my count in approximately 150 places [!] within this short 18-verse segment . Also, the matter of where to break a line in the transcription (admittedly often within a lacuna) differs 7 times, with no notes provided to explain any of these differences from the reading of the original editor, and some of these bracket placements are noticeably wrong, as demonstrated in the examples above where the photograph can be checked. The only clue to C/B's method is their comment in the introduction (p. 14): "This book provides a fresh transcription of each manuscript. For the most part [?], this transcription accords with the _editio princeps_ produced by those editors who first published the work. However, we often [!] deviate from their transcription when we disagree with the editors on the reading of the text as we saw it --whether viewing the actual manuscript or the photographs." In view of the plain and clear errors noted above when comparing the photograph of MS 0189 against both the original Salonius transcript and the C/B rendition of the same, it seems it would have been far better had the editors simply reproduced _without change_ the transcription of the _editio princeps_ in every case rather than make matters worse in those cases where their own lack of accuracy can be clearly verified. Were this MS 0189 the one and only example of blundering accuracy in transcription found in the C/B volume, perhaps one could excuse or mitigate the problem to some degree. However, this is not the case, but errors continue to show up throughout the volume. The following examples are derived primarily from a cursory comparison of the C/B transcriptions with the actual photographs reproduced in that volume (usually poorly and much too darkly); thus, everything noted below should be able to be verified by any interested observer (with a good light and strong magnifying glass): Note that I was not able to verify some of these examples against either the _editio princeps_ or clearer photographs; in some cases there _could_ be a misreading by the present writer (should this be the case, please send corrective comments), but in most cases the photo versus text comparison is quite clear.: EXAMPLE 2: MS 0162 (P.Oxy.847) (Jn 2:11-22) ============================== recto line 15 (Jn 2:15): photo apparently shows EXEBALETO quite clearly; C/B read EXEBALE[N E]K, with a lacuna as indicated. lines 17/18: photo clearly shows EXE/CEEN TA while C/B read EXE/CEEN TO (even though the neuter KERMATA follows). EXAMPLE 3: Papyrus 90 (P.Oxy.3523) ===================== verso line 1: STRATIWTE appears to be the reading in the photo; C/B read the non-itacised STRATIWTAI in their transcription. EXAMPLE 4: Papyrus 75 ===================== p.580, note d, is clearly in error versus the photograph given (p.492). C/B state "A different scribe has written two lines of large letters upside down in the lower margin, probably TONUON WS [K]URIO[N], APO THS ST[RA]PEZ[HS]. But the photograph clearly reads APO THS T[ ]PEZ[ ], and the missing word does _not_ begin with ST- as stated by C/B.. line 23 (Jn 8:15) photo clearly shows EGW DE OU KRINW, while C/B read EGW OU KRINW, omitting DE. Nestle-Aland specifically state P75 here includes the DE. line 4 from bottom (Jn 8:21): C/B give the ungrammatical EN TH AMARTIAN [sic], assuming a nu-suspension; the photo is clearly AMARTIA, and whatever fiber looks to C/B like a nu-suspension is _less_ clear than what _could_ have been mistaken for nu-suspensions in lines 2 and 1 from bottom (which would have produced ELEN/GON and APOKTEN/NEI had they been so read by C/B). EXAMPLE 5: Papyrus 66 ===================== Photo of Jn 6:64-71, line 2, C/B read -OUSIN, while photo clearly shows -OUSI followed by what appears to be a high point along a fiber of papyrus (were this indeed the letter N, then the I would be missing!). line 13: photo clearly shows PE TROS (Jn 6:68) with a gap (the only gap of any kind on the whole page), suggesting erasure by a corrector, yet this was not noted in the transcription by C/B, even though corrections, peculiar gaps, or erasures are normally noted, albeit in the peculiar manner of reading the correction in the text and placing the reading of (*) in the footnotes.. Photo of Jn 13:15-20, line 2 from bottom: AN of (*) is corrected to EAN by an insertion in the left margin just preceding AN. C/B in a note have it totally wrong: "EM was changed to EME by adding E in the margin (c[orr]3)." Yet there is _no_ change to the EME in that line (which word is complete as written by the original hand); C/B simply have their data wrong. PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION: ======================== The upshot of all these _verifiable_ errors in a book dedicated to presenting text-critical students and scholars with an _accurate_ representation of the earliest NT MSS is obvious. When one cannot rely upon the accuracy of the edition in any given instance, the worth of the whole is utterly diminished and vitiated. Even though the book may well be "generally correct" in the main, the fact remains that Comfort and Barrett _cannot_ be depended upon to provide accurate information regarding the reading of any given MS at any point, since there is no real pattern to the errors they themselves commit. Even if it were certain that 98% of their text and transcription were accurate, the apt comparison would have to be made with the clock that loses a minute an hour, wherein one can never be certain of what the exact time happens to be, even though it remains "approximately" accurate most of the time. Given the likelihood of far more problems and errors once the placement and boundaries of bracketed text are included (along with the reconstruction of fragmentary letters), it is far more likely that the said clock is losing two or even three minutes per hour, in which case the value and usefulness of the volume is diminished even further. It appears that the only way to salvage this book might be for someone -- carefully and precisely -- to go over the same ground as Comfort and Barrett, recheck everything they printed regarding the text of any MS, and then produce a lengthy list of errata to this volume which could be sold separately. But of course, given the number of errata which apparently would have to be listed following such a detailed investigation, the better proposal would be to call for _someone else_ to publish their own accurate edition of "the complete text of the earliest NT MSS" and to bypass Comfort and Barrett entirely. Such a project would have to be done in a manner comparable to that of the IGNTP on the papyri of John or the Muenster volumes on the papyrus text of the Epistles -- but this probably implies that the ones best equipped and trained to produce such a volume are in fact those parties. Should anyone else attempt to do the same apart from the degree of accuracy demonstrated in the Muenster and IGNTP volumes, the resultant volume should never be allowed to leave the editors' eyes without a careful proofing by several outside expert readers before going to press. Regrettably, such a process obviously was _not_ followed in regard to the present volume, and it becomes very difficult for me to recommend this volume for any serious scholarly study or use. -30- ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 19 09:18:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA18303; Wed, 19 May 1999 09:18:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 09:18:56 -0400 (EDT) From: "James R. Adair" To: TC List , "Miqra: Hebrew Bible Discussion List" , "Graphai: NT Discussion List" Subject: tc-list AIBI 6 Conference/Call for papers Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 19346 The sixth conference of the Association Internationale Bible et Informatique (AIBI) will be held at the University of Stellenbosch in Stellenbosch, South Africa (near Cape Town), 18-22 July 2000. The theme of the conference is "The Bible and Computers: The Bible From Alpha to Byte (a new millennium)." All are invited. *********************************************************** James R. Adair, Jr. Director, ATLA Center for Electronic Texts in Religion *********************************************************** ASSOCIATION=20 INTERNATIONALE=20 BIBLE ET INFORMATIQUE (A.I.B.I.)=20 c/o CIB-MAREDSOUS B-5537 Den=8Ee=20 T=8El.: 32(0)82 69 96 47 Fax.: 32(0)82 22 32 69=20 E-mail: CIBMARE@FUNDP.AC.BE SIXI=E9ME CONFERENCE INTERNATIONALE (A.I.B.I.-6) SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE (A.I.B.I.-6)=20 THE BIBLE AND COMPUTERS: THE BIBLE FROM ALPHA TO BYTE (a new millennium)=20 LA BIBLE ET INFORMATIQUE: LA BIBLE DE L'E ALPHABET =CB L'OCTET (un nouveau mill=8Enaire)=20 DIE BIBLE UND INFORMATIK: DIE BIBEL VON ALPHA BIS ZUM BYTE (ein neues Jahrtausend)=20 Stellenbosch, 18-22 July 2000 Conference Mailing Address: Prof. Johann Cook=20 Department of Ancient Studies, Faculty of Arts,=20 Private Bag XI, University of Stellenbosch,=20 7602 Matieland, SOUTH AFRICA=20 Tel.: 027-21-8083207 Fax.: 027-21-8083480 E-mail: COOK@akad.sun.ac.za INVITATION The A.I.B.I. invites you to participate in the 6th International Conference on the Bible and Computers. It will take place in Stellenbosch, South Africa from 18 through 22 July 2000. The Department of Ancient Studies at the University of Stellenbosch will host this first conference in the new millennium. Prof. Johann Cook will act as president and organiser of this meeting. English will be the principal language of the conference. However, contributions can also be presented in French, Spanish and German.=20 EINLADUNG Die A.I.B.I. l=8Adt Sie ein zum 6. A.I.B.I. Kongress, der vom 18. bis zum 22. Juli 2000 in Stellenbosch, S=9Fdafrika stattfinden wird. Die Abteilung Antike Studien der Universit=8At Stellenbosch wird als Gastgeber dieses ersten Kongresses im neuen Jahrtausend auftreten. Prof. Dr. Johann Cook wird als Pr=8Asident und Organisator des Kongresses auftreten. Englisch wir= d die Hauptsprache des Kongresses sein, aber Beitr=8Age d=9Frfen auch auf Franz=9Asisch, Spanisch und Deutsch angeboten werden. =20 THEME=20 The Bible from Alpha to Byte:=20 The A.I.B.I. conferences have dealt with a number of issues over the past 15 years. The 1st meeting took place in Louvain-la-Neuve in 1985 and concentrated on the TEXT. In 1988 in Jerusalem the theme was METHODS, TOOLS and RESULTS. The conference in T=9Fbingen in 1991 had METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES as its focus. In Amsterdam the IMPACT OF COMPUTERS ON BIBLICAL STUDIES was considered and finally TRANSLATION AND TRANSMISSION was the topic at the last meeting in Aix-en-Provence. The executive committee in the persons of Johann Cook and Ferdinand Poswick met in Leiden in July 1998 and decided to be less prescriptive for A.I.B.I.-6. Seeing that we are on the eve of a new millennium, it was decided to leave the field open for creative and innovative topics. Contributors will be requested to envisage the future of their research as broadly as possible in terms of the evolution of technology, computers, internet, multimedia, miniaturization, cultural pluralism, loss of text-literacy, massmedia and constraints on the expression of opinion, new tools for exploring archaeological materials, world organization of research and knowledge, etc. In short, how should the Bible be made relevant via the computer in the 21st century?=20 THEMA=20 Die Bibel von Alpha bis zum Byte:=20 Die A.I.B.I. Kongresse haben in den letzten 15 Jahren eine Reihe von Fragen untersucht. Der erste Kongress fand in Louvain-la-Neuve in 1985 statt und konzentrierte sich auf den TEXT. 1988 in Jerusalem war das Thema METHODEN, WERKZEUGE und ERGEBNISSE. Der Kongress in T=9Fbingen im Jahr 1991 hatte METHODISCHE FRAGEN zum Thema. In Amsterdam besch=8Aftigten Kongressg=8Anger sich mit der Frage =9Fber den EINFLUSS DER COMPUTER AUF BIBLISCHE STUDIEN. =86BERSETZUNG UND =86BERTRAGUNG war das Objekt der Forschung bei der letzten Begegnung in Aix-en-Provence. Das Exekutivkomitee, Johann Cook und Ferdinand Poswick, ist im Juli 1998 in Leiden zusammengekommen und hat beschlossen, Forschern mehr Freiheit zu lassen bei der Auswahl der Themen f=9Fr die A.I.B.I.-6. Weil wir am Voraben= d eines neue Jahrtausends stehen, wurde beschlossen, Mitgliedern die M=9Aglichkeit zu geben bei der Themenauswahl kreativ und innovativ zu sein. Deshalb werden Beitragende gebeten, die Zukunft ihrer Forschung zu konzipieren im Hinblick auf die Entwicklung der Technologie, Computer, das Internet, Multimedia, Miniaturisierung, kultureller Pluralismus, Verlust von Textbildung, Massenmedien und Zw=8Angebei der freien Meinungs=8Ausserun= g, neue Werkzeuge zur Erforschung von arch=8Aologische Artefakten, weltweite Organisation von Forschung und Wissen, usw. Kurz gesagt, wie sollte die Bibel relevant gemacht werden mit dem Computer im 21. Jahrhundert!=20 CONTRIBUTIONS The conference will consist of two parts. The first two days (Monday and Tuesday) will be taken up with practical workshops. On Monday morning participants will be guided into the "mysteries" of computer know-how, with emphasis on hands-on practical experience. In the afternoon Computer and Grammar will be the theme. On Tuesday morning the Computer and multi-media will be discussed, while the issue of the Computer and textual issues will be addressed on Tuesday afternoon.=20 The second part of the conference (Wednesday-Friday) will be structured as follows:=20 Section 1. Hebrew Bible/Old Testament.=20 Section 2. The Greek Bible (Septuagint).=20 Section 3. The New Testament.=20 Each section will consist of a keynote address of 60 minutes, selected by the executive committee. Thereafter short papers of 30 minutes will be presented.=20 Those interested in reading a paper should return the attached form with the title and an indication of the content of the paper immediately to the Secretary of the A.I.B.I.: A.I.B.I.-6 contributions c/o CIB-Maredsous, B-5537 Den=8Ee - Belgium - Fax 32(0)82223269. E-mail CIBMARE@FUNDP.AC.BE BEITR=80GE=20 Der Kongress besteht aus zwei Teilen. W=8Ahrend der ersten zwei Tagen (Montag und Dinstag) werden einige "Workshops" stattfinden. Am Montag-Morgen kriegen Mitglieder die Gelegenheit um die "Mysterien" der Computer know-how zu bekommen. Hier geht es prim=8Ar =9Fber praktische =86b= ung. W=8Ahrend des Mittags ist Computer und Grammatik zum Thema. Computer und di= e Multi-media wird am Dinstag-Morgen am Schlag kommen. Schliesslich wird das Thema die Computer und textuele Fragen angesprochen am Dinstag-Mittag.=20 Der zweite Teil des Kongresses (Mittwoch bis Freitag) wird in folgenden Sektionen strukturiert:=20 Sektion 1. Die Hebr=8Aische Bibel / Altes Testament.=20 Sektion 2. Die Griechische Bibel (Septuaginta).=20 Sektion 3. Das neue Testament.=20 Jede Sektion beginnt mit einer "Keynote address" von 60 Minuten, die von dem Exekutivkomitee gew=8Ahlt ist. Nachher kriegt Mitglieder die Gelegenheiten f=9Fr kurze Beitr=8Age von 30 Minuten.=20 Diejenige die gern einen Beitrag machen m=9Achten, sollten unverz=9Fglich d= en Abschnitt der letzten Seite zur=9Fckschickt an das A.I.B.I.-Sekretariat: A.I.B.I.-6 contributions, c/o CIB-Maredsous, B-5537 Den=8Ee - Belgium - Fax 32(0)82223269. E-mail CIBMARE@FUNDP.AC.BE. Sie brauchen einen Titel und einen Hinweis auf den Inhalt des Beitrags.=20 DEADLINES=20 1. 31 May 1999:=20 Abstract submitted to the Programme Committee (A.I.B.I.-6, c/o Prof. Johann Cook, Chairman of the Programme Committee, Department of Ancient Studies, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag XI, 7602 Matieland, SOUTH AFRICA. Fax-027-21-808-3480; e-mail: COOK@ADM.SUN.AC.ZA).=20 2. 20 November 1999:=20 Selection of papers by the Programme Committee.=20 3. 10 January 2000:=20 Submission of the final text of the summary of the contribution as it will appear in the Programme to the Programme Committee. The summary should not exceed two pages; it should be submitted in electronic format with a specification of the programme used, etc. The heading should contain the title, the author's name, address, institution and the title of the contribution.=20 4. 15 March 2000:=20 Registration forms will be sent to all contributors and/or potential participants.=20 5. 31 May 2000:=20 Draft of complete text of contributions to Prof. Cook.=20 6. 22 July 2000:=20 Camera ready text of contribution (hard copy and on disket).=20 7. 30 October 2000 Final deadline for submission of contributions for publication by CIB-Maredsous.=20 These should either be "camera-ready" (A4 format, with a full and suitably documented electronic version); or in the form of a Post-Script file which should be well-documented (machine, environment, word processing or CAP, version, file name), and with a hard paper copy enclosed.=20 8. Publication:=20 End of 2000, beginning of 2001.=20 TERMINE=20 1. 31. Mai 1999:=20 Die Zusammenfassung des vorgeschlagenen Beitrags muss beim Programmausschuss eingegangen sein (A.I.B.I.-6 contributions, c/o Prof. Johann Cook, Chairman of the Programme Committee, Department of Ancient Studies, University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag XI, 7602 Matieland, SOUTH AFRICA. Fax-027-21-808-3480; e-mail: COOK@ADM.SUN.AC.ZA).=20 2. 20. November 1999:=20 Entscheidungen des Programmausschusses =9Fber die Einf=9Fgung oder Nichtber=9Fcksichtigung der vorgeschlagenen Beitr=8Age und =9Fber ihren Pla= tz im Programm. Best=8Atigung bei den Beitragsautoren.=20 3. 10. Januar 2000:=20 Versand des endg=9Fltigen Textes der Zusammenfassung des Beitrags an den Programmenausschuss. Diese Zusammenfassung sollte h=9Achstens 2 Seiten sein= , mit einer elektronischen Kopie des ausf=9Fhrlich dokumentierten Textes (Textverarbeitungsprogramme, uzw); weiter muss die der Name des Autors, Adresse, Einrichtung und die Titel des Beitrags umfassen.=20 4. 15. M=8Arz 2000:=20 Versand des Einschreibungsformulars an alle Personen, die m=9Aglicherweise einen Beitrag leisten und/oder teilnehmen werden.=20 5. 31. Mai 2000:=20 Versand des vollst=8Andigen Textentwurfes f=9Fr den Beitrag an den Programmausschus (Prof. Cook).=20 6. 22. Juli 2000:=20 Hinterlegung entweder eine "Camera-ready" Text des Beitrags (Format A4, mit einer ungek=9Frtzten, ausreichend dokumentarisch belegten elektronische= n Kopie) oder in Form einer ausreichend belegten Post-Script-Datei (Maschine, Umfeld, Textverarbeitung oder PAO, Fassung, Name der Datei) mit einem Ausdruck des Inhaltes auf Papier als Anlage.=20 7. 30. Oktober 2000:=20 Schlusstermin f=9Fr die Hinterlegung der Beitr=8Age, die in CIB-Maredsous ver=9Affentlicht werden sollen.=20 8. Ver=9Affentlichung:=20 Ver=9Affentlichung alle Beitr=8Age am Ende 2000, oder beginn 1998.=20 REGISTRATION VENUE - COST VENUE:=20 Stellenbosch is a university town where approximately 15,000 students live and study. The town is some 50 km from Cape Town at the foot of the beautiful mountains in the Western Cape. It is 20 km away from the sea. The University of Stellenbosch is situated 40 km from the International Airport of Cape Town. All participants will be met at the airport and brought to Stellenbosch. The time of arrival MUST be sent to the organisor in advance.=20 DATES:=20 Workshops: Monday and Tuesday (18th and 19th of July) (traditional barbeque Monday evening).=20 Papers: Wednesday-Friday (20th -22nd of July).=20 Excursion into the Stellenbosch wine district: Thursday afternoon.=20 Banquet: Thursday evening.=20 COSTS:=20 Costs are naturally dependent on various factors. They will be determined at the current exchange rate.=20 a) Registration: Includes the programme and summary of all contributions - organization - coffee breaks - barbeque - excursion - banquet and subscription to the Proceedings of the Conference.=20 A.I.B.I. members:=20 Before 30th of May 2000 =3D US$ 300=20 After 30th of May 2000 =3D US$ 325=20 Non-members A.I.B.I.:=20 Before 30th of May 2000 =3D US$ 325=20 After 30th of May 2000 =3D US$ 350=20 b) Accommodation:=20 There are numerous possibilities. As the conference is taking place during the winter vacation of the university, cheaper accommodation in university residences is available. The prices are as follows:=20 Bed alone - US$ 20=20 Meals:=20 Breakfast - US$ 7 Mid-day: US$ 12 Evening: US$ 10=20 There are also excellent hotels available in Stellenbosch for those who want more expensive lodgings. Relevant addresses and information concerning accommodation and possible excursions will be made available to those who are interested. Stellenbosch is situated in the southern part of South Africa. Excursions can also be made to the northern parts of the country, such as the Kruger National Game Reserve.=20 c) Flight costs:=20 The organiser is currently involved in discussions with a travelling agent. If tickets are bought in South Africa a discount of up to 15% can be arranged. The name of the agent as well as applicable information will be included in the brochure. People planning to come to SOUTH AFRICA will be well advised to make use of these special offers.=20 ANMELDUNGEN STANDORT - KOSTEN=20 STANDORT:=20 Stellenbosch ist eine Universit=8Atstadt wo ungef=8Ahr 15,000 Studenten studieren. Die Stadt ist 50 km weit vom Kapstadt in die Umgebung von grossen Berge in die westliche Kap. Das Meer ist nur 20 km weg. Die Universit=8At Stellenbosch ist situiert 40 km weit vom internationalen Flughafen von Kapstadt. Alle Mitglieder werden bei dem Flughafen abgeholt und nach Stellenbosch gebracht. Die Zeit der Ankomst der Kongressg=8Anger MUSST deshalb zu Programmausschuss geschickt werden.=20 DATEN:=20 "Workshops": Montag und Dinstag (18. und 19. Juli) (traditioneles Bratfest - Montag-Abend).=20 Beitr=8Age: Mittwoch-Freitag (20.-22. Juli).=20 Ausflug zum Stellenbosch Wein Bezirkt: Donnerstag-Mittag.=20 Bankett: Donnerstag-Abend.=20 KOSTEN:=20 Kosten sind abh=8Angig von vielen Faktoren. Der Richtpreis gilt unter Vorbehalt der Best=8Atigung beim Versand der Einschreibungsformulare.=20 a) Einschreibungen:=20 Umfasst der Programm und Zusammenfassung der Beitr=8Age - Organisation - Kaffeepausen - Ausflug - Bankett und Bezug der Aufzeichnungen des Kolloquiums.=20 A.I.B.I.-Mitglieder:=20 Einschreibung vor dem 30. Mai 2000 =3D US$ 300=20 Nach dem 30. Mai 2000 =3D US$ 325=20 Nichtmitglieder von A.I.B.I.:=20 Einschreibung vor dem 30. Mai 2000 =3D US$ 325=20 Nach dem 30. Mai 2000 =3D US$ 350=20 b) Unterkunft:=20 Er sind viele M=9Aglichkeiten. Weil das Kongress w=8Ahrend der Winterferien stattfinden werden habe die Universit=8At Unterkunft in den Universit=8Atswohnheime. Die Preise sind wie folgende:=20 =86bernachtung - US$ 20 (per Person)=20 Mahlzeit:=20 Fr=9Fhst=9Fck - US$ 7 Mittags: US$ 12 Abends: US$ 10=20 In und in der Umgebung von Stellenbosch sind manche Hotels und Pensionen. Addressen und Information in Bezug auf Unterkunft und Ausfl=9Fge werden zu denjenigen geschicht worden die ein Interesse haben. Stellenbosch ist situiert in den s=9Fdlichen Teil von S=9Fdafrika. Es ist m=9Aglich Ausfl=9F= ge zu machen zu den n=9Ardlichen Teile des Landes, z.B. nach dem Kruger nationale Wildpark.=20 c) Flugzeug Preise:=20 Der Vorsitz ist zur Zeit besch=8Aftigt mit Diskussionen =9Fber billige Prei= se. Wenn Billeten in S=9Fdafrika gekauft werden kann man bis 15% Rabatt bekommen. Der Name des Vermittlers und passende Information wird zu denjenigen geschickt werden die interessiert sind. Personen die planen nach S=9Fdafrika zu reisen sollten diese M=9Aglichkeiten bedenken.=20 PROGRAMME COMMITTEE / COMIT=83 PROGRAMME / PROGRAMM KOMITEE President / Pr=8Esidence / Vorsitz:=20 PROFESSOR Johann Cook=20 Department of Ancient Studies, Faculty of Arts,=20 University of Stellenbosch, Private Bag XI,=20 7602 Matieland, SOUTH AFRICA.=20 Tel.: 027-21-8083207 Fax.: 027-21-8083480 E-mail: COOK@akad.sun.ac.za Members / Membres / Mitgleiter=20 Theo Bothma (University of Pretoria, SA)=20 Ph. Cassuto (Aix-en-Provence, France)=20 JC de Moor (Kampen, Holland)=20 AD Forbes (Pasedena, USA)=20 F Polak (Tel Aviv, Israel)=20 R-F Poswick (Maredsous, Belgium) H Schweizer (T=9Fbingen, Germany) N Timmins (Edinburgh, UK)=20 L Vegas Montaner (Madrid, Spain) M Vervenne (Leuven, Belgium).=20 The Faculty of Arts of the University of Stellenbosch, where the conference will take place, is situated in the center of the University town. It accommodates the largest number of students (circa 3000) at the university. It has excellent facilities available for the conference. There are a large number of computers in large halls connected with the internet. In addition smaller and larger seminar rooms are readily available. All rooms are equipped with modern technology for the purposes of communicating research results.=20 This is a map of the location of Stellenbosch in relation to other main centres in the Western Cape.=20 Hombre men's residence is a brand new hostel in the main street of the university campus, Victoria Street. It can accommodate 285 people in 86 single and 195 double rooms. It is a 10-minute walk to the Arts building through the heart of Stellenbosch, student residences and other facilities, such as banks, shopping centres, cinemas and restaurants.=20 A.I.B.I.: 6TH CONFERENCE=20 STELLENBOSCH: 18TH - 22ND OF JULY 2000=20 CONTRIBUTION PROPOSAL=20 PROPOSITION DE CONTRIBUTION=20 Name:=20 Mr., Mrs., Ms ____________________________________________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________ Tel: _________________________ ___________________________________________________ Fax: ________________________ ___________________________________________________ E-mail: ______________________ Proposes a contribution of 25 min. with the following title: ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ This contribution would be appropriate for the following section(s):=20 Section 1: The Hebrew Bible / Old Testament Section 2: The Greek Bible / Septuagint=20 Section 3: The New Testament / First Testament=20 I will need the following hardware equipment for presentation: _____________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________= _____ Please keep me informed about this A.I.B.I.-6 conference.=20 Place____________________ Day: ____________________ Signature: _____________________ Send back as soon as possible to:=20 A.I.B.I.-6 Conference=20 c/o CIB-Maredsous, B-5537 Den=8Ee-Belgium Fax 32(0) 82 22 32 69 E-mail: CIBMARE@FUNDP.AC.BE=20 From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 19 09:29:13 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA18428; Wed, 19 May 1999 09:29:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 14:34 +0100 From: "Howard Freedman" To: "tc-list" Subject: tc-list Absent notification Message-ID: <19990519143437886-2aa93a9c@datastreamicv.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 393 Please note that Howard Freedman has migrated to Microsoft Exchange. The username has changed to "SURNAME, FORENAME". Please check the global address list for the correct e-mail address otherwise please contact your local IT Department. Please remember to update your personal address book. Your message has been forwarded onto Howard's new account and you do not need to resend your mail. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 03:24:44 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id DAA23281; Thu, 20 May 1999 03:24:43 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:30:08 +0200 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu References: <1.5.4.32.19990505170735.0066b51c@highland.net> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Sender: 320003854441-0001@t-online.de From: U.B.Schmid@t-online.de (Dr. Ulrich Schmid) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 775 On May 5, 1999, Jim West wrote: > P. Comfort's new book, "The Complete Text of the Earliest NT Manuscripts" > has arrived and it is really a tremendous thing! > > mss include p1 - 104 (with some lacunae), and some other early uncials. The > book offers the mss in P order. Some photos are included as well as a fine > introduction. 649 pp. of great resources for the textual critic and NT > scholar. > > The transcriptions are really excellent and are exact!, including > abbreviations within the papyri themselves. Jim, could you, please, comment on Maurice' detailed analysis arriving at the opposite conclusion with respect to the quality of Comfort/Barrett's transcriptions. ------------------------------------------ Dr. Ulrich Schmid U.B.Schmid@t-online.de From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 07:39:52 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id HAA24575; Thu, 20 May 1999 07:39:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 07:45:41 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990520114541.00671f48@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1622 At 09:30 AM 5/20/99 +0200, you wrote: > >could you, please, comment on Maurice' detailed analysis arriving at the >opposite conclusion with respect to the quality of Comfort/Barrett's >transcriptions. The ms I examined were different than those looked at by Maurice. My main interest is the "major papyri". When I looked at those I did not discover the egregious errors pointed out by Maurice. I still suggest that Comfort's book is a very useful tool- but Maurice is correct in his notion that the "minor" papyri need a more thorough look. Perhaps C/B were more focused on the more interesting papyri while spending less time on the others. Who knows but them. In any event, I do think that Maurice is being a little hard on them. Percentage wise the C/B book contains less scribal errors than most of the Byzantine mss---- and yet Maurice seems to have no problem with them. For example- the C/B book contains much more accurate transcriptions than it does inaccurate- but Maurice doe not bother to point these out. In fact, the bulk, the vast majority of the book is quite accurate. So perhaps something else is afoot here in Maurice's comments? It is well known that Comfort and Robinson do not see eye to eye... I do not think that the few errors (and they really are a VERY small number of errors in respect to percent) make this book less useful- though it must be used with care- as must any ms of the biblical text. Certainly it is no dishonor to make errors. Most of us do. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 08:50:04 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA24847; Thu, 20 May 1999 08:50:04 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 07:55:43 -0500 (CDT) From: Bruce Morrill To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990520114541.00671f48@highland.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 635 On Thu, 20 May 1999, Jim West wrote: > The ms I examined were different than those looked at by Maurice. My main > interest is the "major papyri". When I looked at those I did not discover > the egregious errors pointed out by Maurice. I still suggest that Comfort's > book is a very useful tool- but Maurice is correct in his notion that the > "minor" papyri need a more thorough look. Maurice has been most helpful in detailing the problems he found. Can you specify which of the major papyri you have found worthy of our trust, so that the rest of us can similarly benefit from your time? Bruce Morrill bruce@math.ksu.edu From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 10:20:52 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA25270; Thu, 20 May 1999 10:20:51 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 10:26:36 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990520142636.0066d100@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1013 At 07:55 AM 5/20/99 -0500, you wrote: > > >Maurice has been most helpful in detailing the problems he found. Can you >specify which of the major papyri you have found worthy of our trust, so >that the rest of us can similarly benefit from your time? > >Bruce Morrill bruce@math.ksu.edu Let me understand what your asking. You wish me to list the texts where the transcription of comfort is the same as the mss he is transcribing? Ok- presuming this is what you want, take a look at p75- Lk 3:18-19 p75- Lk 9:1 p75 Lk 13:28-30 Every single letter is precisely the same here (in this small sampling) in comforts book as it is in P75. Examples could be listed for every single page of the manuscript. Get Comfort's book. Its a treasure in spite of a few mistakes. Again, the correct passages FAR outweigh any errors- just as the Alexandrian texts far outweigh in value the Byzantine. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 10:46:18 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA25433; Thu, 20 May 1999 10:46:18 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990520142636.0066d100@highland.net> Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 09:49:05 -0500 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Robert B. Waltz" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2248 On 5/20/99, Jim West wrote, in part: >Let me understand what your asking. You wish me to list the texts where the >transcription of comfort is the same as the mss he is transcribing? > >Ok- presuming this is what you want, >take a look at >p75- Lk 3:18-19 >p75- Lk 9:1 >p75 Lk 13:28-30 > >Every single letter is precisely the same here (in this small sampling) in >comforts book as it is in P75. Examples could be listed for every single >page of the manuscript. You're willing to certify the accuracy of the transcription based on checking six verses? No wonder there is controversy about the book's value. :-) This is simply not an acceptable sample; it's too small to tell us anything. Note that this is not a comment on the accuracy of the book; I haven't seen it and cannot comment. However, Robinson has supplied a significant list of mistakes. Given that this is a published book, not a manuscript, we have the right to expect accuracy. Given the large number of errors already listed, we would need to see hundreds of verses tested before we could certify it as generally accurate. Saying that it is accurate here and there is simply anecdotal evidence. >Get Comfort's book. Its a treasure in spite of a few mistakes. Again, the >correct passages FAR outweigh any errors- just as the Alexandrian texts far >outweigh in value the Byzantine. This analogy simply doesn't hold water. The accuracy of a transcription can be proved: You compare the transcription with the original. The accuracy of a text-type can only be assumed -- particularly since that text-type does not exist in any extant manuscript. Note that I am not disagreeing with the premise that the Alexandrian manuscripts are more accurate than the Byzantine (though Robinson would :-). I am simply stating that this is completely irrelevant. At this point, I cannot see that anything has been offered on this list to refute Robinson's criticisms. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Robert B. Waltz waltzmn@skypoint.com 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 owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 11:05:18 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA26100; Thu, 20 May 1999 11:05:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:10:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Bart Ehrman X-Sender: behrman@login1.isis.unc.edu To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list comforting Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 492 I've been away for a couple of weeks, and appear to have deleted Maurice Robinson's detailed description of errors in Comfort's new book. Could someone send it to me? As I think I've mentioned on this list before, I declined to blurb the book because I found the introduction sent to me to be so full of egregious historical errors that I couldn't bring myself to endorse the workmanship, though I appreciated the idea. -- Bart D. Ehrman University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 11:07:33 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id LAA26118; Thu, 20 May 1999 11:07:32 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:10:13 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990520151013.0068f934@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2713 At 09:49 AM 5/20/99 -0500, you wrote: >On 5/20/99, Jim West wrote, in part: > >You're willing to certify the accuracy of the transcription based on >checking six verses? No wonder there is controversy about the book's >value. :-) > No- but I dont have the time or desire to list hundreds of passages where the transcription is accurate to refute 12 examples of where it is not. My original comments about the book were simply intended to describe its value- not to critique the whole bloody thing. >This is simply not an acceptable sample; it's too small to tell >us anything. Then get the book and count them all yourself. > >Note that this is not a comment on the accuracy of the book; I haven't >seen it and cannot comment. However, Robinson has supplied a significant >list of mistakes. Given that this is a published book, not a manuscript, >we have the right to expect accuracy. Given the fact that listers evidently have more free time than I, I suggest they get the book themselves and do their own comparisons. > >Given the large number of errors already listed, we would need to >see hundreds of verses tested before we could certify it as >generally accurate. Saying that it is accurate here and there >is simply anecdotal evidence. Large number of errors? Percentage wise what amount of errors have been listed? > >>Get Comfort's book. Its a treasure in spite of a few mistakes. Again, the >>correct passages FAR outweigh any errors- just as the Alexandrian texts far >>outweigh in value the Byzantine. > >This analogy simply doesn't hold water. The accuracy of a transcription >can be proved: You compare the transcription with the original. The >accuracy of a text-type can only be assumed -- particularly since that >text-type does not exist in any extant manuscript. > Ok- then get the book- go thorugh it line by line with the mss you have at hand, and make your own decision. Why believe Robinson or me? Do the work yourself. >Note that I am not disagreeing with the premise that the Alexandrian >manuscripts are more accurate than the Byzantine (though Robinson >would :-). I am simply stating that this is completely irrelevant. Just as it is completely irrelevant to judge the value of a book by a few errors rather than by the many correct passages. You got my point. > >At this point, I cannot see that anything has been offered on this >list to refute Robinson's criticisms. Thats because my purpose isnt to refute Robinson. The book does that itself. His few listed errors simply do not make the book useless. So again, get it and see for yourself. Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 12:00:08 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA27026; Thu, 20 May 1999 12:00:07 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 18:05:25 +0200 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu References: <1.5.4.32.19990520114541.00671f48@highland.net> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Sender: 320003854441-0001@t-online.de From: U.B.Schmid@t-online.de (Dr. Ulrich Schmid) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 4199 Jim West wrote: > At 09:30 AM 5/20/99 +0200, you wrote: > > > > >could you, please, comment on Maurice' detailed analysis arriving at the > >opposite conclusion with respect to the quality of Comfort/Barrett's > >transcriptions. > > The ms I examined were different than those looked at by Maurice. My main > interest is the "major papyri". When I looked at those I did not discover > the egregious errors pointed out by Maurice. I still suggest that Comfort's > book is a very useful tool- but Maurice is correct in his notion that the > "minor" papyri need a more thorough look. > > Perhaps C/B were more focused on the more interesting papyri while spending > less time on the others. Who knows but them. > > In any event, I do think that Maurice is being a little hard on them. > Percentage wise the C/B book contains less scribal errors than most of the > Byzantine mss---- and yet Maurice seems to have no problem with them. For > example- the C/B book contains much more accurate transcriptions than it > does inaccurate- but Maurice doe not bother to point these out. In fact, > the bulk, the vast majority of the book is quite accurate. I'm quite confused about your reply, Jim. A) On the one side you confess that you only looked at the "major papyri" (without specification!) and on the other side you make confident claims ("the vast majority of the book is quite accurate"), as if you have checked all the transcriptions throughout the C/B book. What do I have to make out of this? B) I'm delighted to learn that - for the sake of comparison - you studied ALL of "the Byzantine mss", for, according to you, "the C/B book contains less scribal errors than most of" them. Even more amazing: You identified the direct "Vorlage" of every single Byzantine manuscript in order to exactly ascribe every single reading in every single Byzantine manuscript to either it's "Vorlage" (or "Vorlagen" respectively) or it's scribe, having committed THE "scribal error". (Sorry, I couldn't resist. Your point here is utterly unsound.) >So perhaps > something else is afoot here in Maurice's comments? It is well known that > Comfort and Robinson do not see eye to eye... I think it's fair to ask you not to use ad hominem arguments. They usually don't compensate lack of real argument, and certainly not lack of hard evidence. >I do not think that the few > errors (and they really are a VERY small number of errors in respect to > percent) make this book less useful- though it must be used with care- as > must any ms of the biblical text. Certainly it is no dishonor to make > errors. Most of us do. Probably all of us do make errors. The point is: How many errors in what type of publication? If we are dealing with a reference tool, the amount of errors certainly plays a vital role. What is the C/F book intended to be? Here is a real life example (food for thought): A Latin manuscript C from the 9th century was edited in the 19th century, in other words: It was transcribed by a scholar of modern times with modern times standards of even reporting corrections, different hands, etc. The body of text consists of about 40.000 words. I performed a spot-check on the edition with a microfilm of the pertinent manuscript. The spot-check covered aproximately 10 percent of the text. The result was that on an average 2.8 errors per page in the edition occured, adding up to a total of about 380 errors for the whole body of text. That's not much. It's less than 1 percent. However, another scholar using the 19th century edition performed a comparison of this (edition of the) 9th century witness (C) with a 6th century witness (F) of the same text. On the basis of a list of deviating readings he concluded that C could not have been a direct copy of F. Whether he was right or wrong doesn't matter for the moment, the sad truth is that more than 50 percent of the readings in his list hit on errors in the edition of witness C. In every single case the two witnesses do NOT deviate, only their modern transcriptions. That's disturbing, isnt it. ------------------------------------------ Dr. Ulrich Schmid U.B.Schmid@t-online.de From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 12:23:19 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA27766; Thu, 20 May 1999 12:23:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:27:26 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3510 At 06:05 PM 5/20/99 +0200, you wrote: >Jim West wrote: >A) On the one side you confess that you only looked at the "major papyri" >(without specification!) and on the other side you make confident claims ("the >vast majority of the book is quite accurate"), as if you have checked all the >transcriptions throughout the C/B book. What do I have to make out of this? Dunno. I read the book- compared the whole of P75- and some other mss. that I have copies of- and found it extremely reliable. I did not write down any results because I am not writing a review of the book. My response is based on an overall perception. > >B) I'm delighted to learn that - for the sake of comparison - you studied ALL of >"the Byzantine mss", for, according to you, "the C/B book contains less scribal >errors than most of" them. Even more amazing: You identified the direct >"Vorlage" of every single Byzantine manuscript in order to exactly ascribe every >single reading in every single Byzantine manuscript to either it's "Vorlage" (or >"Vorlagen" respectively) or it's scribe, having committed THE "scribal error". >(Sorry, I couldn't resist. Your point here is utterly unsound.) My point has been missed. My point is this- the Byzantine family of mss is, on the whole, less reliable than the Alexandrian- just as the majority of Comfort's book is reliable, in spite of the few errors. >Probably all of us do make errors. The point is: How many errors in what type of >publication? If we are dealing with a reference tool, the amount of errors >certainly plays a vital role. What is the C/F book intended to be? Yes- the amount of errors do play a role. And the errors of Comforts book are far fewer than his accurate transcriptions. >However, another scholar using the 19th century edition performed a comparison >of this (edition of the) 9th century witness (C) with a 6th century witness (F) >of the same text. >On the basis of a list of deviating readings he concluded that C could not have >been a direct copy of F. >Whether he was right or wrong doesn't matter for the moment, the sad truth is >that more than 50 percent of the readings in his list hit on errors in the >edition of witness C. >In every single case the two witnesses do NOT deviate, only their modern >transcriptions. > >That's disturbing, isnt it. It is very distrubing. Equally disturbing is the notion that the baby should be tossed out with the bathwater. My rather general statements about the Byzantine mss are clearly inaccurate- as are all generalities. My point in intentionally stating something so clearly inaccurate was to evoke a mental image: if the Byz mss should not all be lumped together and considered inaccurate for a few readings, why should Comfort's book? If Bart doesn't like the introduction to the book- why does the rest of the book thereby become worthless? If Comfort makes a few errors (I defy anyone to find any manuscript of any book- ancient or modern, WITHOUT an error of grammar, fact, or typography), then why should the whole of his book be demonized as useless? My point, in sum, is that even though there are errors, the book is still very important and very useful. It is not infallible. And neither is the Bible. Yet folk use the Bible every day as a guide for truth. Comforts book too can be a very useful guide to the mss of the papyri. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 13:17:24 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id NAA28198; Thu, 20 May 1999 13:17:24 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 12:25:17 -0500 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Robert B. Waltz" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2778 This will be my last post on this. But this is just too baldly wrong to be permitted. On 5/20/99, Jim West wrote, in part: >My point has been missed. My point is this- the Byzantine family of mss is, >on the whole, less reliable than the Alexandrian- just as the majority of >Comfort's book is reliable, in spite of the few errors. I think Dr. Schmid saw your point, and refuted it twice. There are several points here: 1) You are confusing accuracy of text with accuracy of copying. Most of us would agree that the Byzantine text is not as good a representative of the original New Testament text as is the Alexandrian text. But this does not mean that a Byzantine manuscript is a poorer *copy* than an Alexandrian; it is simply a poorer *manuscript.* The Byzantine manuscripts are often better copies -- that is, they represent their exemplars more accurately. A simple glance at an edition of, say, Aleph or Theta will prove that a manuscript can be very valuable and *still* be a lousy copy. 2) Let's ignore that. Even so, you are making an argument based on a non sequitur. The nature of the Byzantine text has nothing to do with Comfort's book. The Byzantine text could be exactly identical to the autograph, and Comfort's book would be unaffected. Comfort either is or is not an accurate transcription of the papyri. Appealing to the Byzantine text simply confuses the issue. [ ... ] >Yes- the amount of errors do play a role. And the errors of Comforts book >are far fewer than his accurate transcriptions. This also raises two questions: 1) How do you know?, and 2) So what? Every edition ever made (I venture to suggest) is more accurate than not -- that is, the number of places where it accurately reflects the text of the manuscripts exceeds the number of places where it differs. By that standard, the Textus Receptus is an accurate copy of the United Bible Societies text. (I'm serious; it *is* -- if you accept the trivial standard that it's right more often than wrong.) But I've seen Merk's edition roundly condemned for its inaccuracies -- even though, testing Merk, one finds it to be about 95% accurate overall, and better than that for the Old Uncials. When using an edition, we have a right to question its accuracy. What we have seen so far is a researched set of information about its inaccuracy, and anecdotal evidence about its accuracy. I find this very disturbing. Particularly since the book comes from Comfort. (I say this because, in my experience, Comfort is about as brainless a critic as there is. His only criterion is age, and yet he accepts age uncritically....) Bob Waltz waltzmn@skypoint.com "The one thing we learn from history -- is that no one ever learns from history." From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 14:33:34 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA28565; Thu, 20 May 1999 14:33:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:38:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Bart Ehrman X-Sender: behrman@login1.isis.unc.edu To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list No more comfort Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 230 OK, I've received a couple of copies of Maurice's comments on the Comfort volume. No more needed! (BTW, all the copies I've received are letter for letter the same. :-)) Thanks to those who have sent them. -- Bart Ehrman From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 15:09:24 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA29332; Thu, 20 May 1999 15:09:23 -0400 Message-ID: <37445F46.F02015E0@volstate.net> Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:15:19 -0400 From: "Nelson D. Roth" Organization: Compu-Sistance X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book References: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 704 Jim: As a more-than-casual reader of the TC-List I have found the list to be quite inforative in many respects. As I read a segment of your message I wondered if you would elaborate upon the term "infallible" in relation to Biblical literature and also share your perspective on the concept of inspiration. The quote that I'm referring to follows: > My point, in sum, is that even though there are errors, the book is still > very important and very useful. It is not infallible. And neither is the >Bible. Yet folk use the Bible every day as a guide for truth. Comforts > book too can be a very useful guide to the mss of the papyri. Hope this doesn't take us too far off the list. Nelson Roth From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 15:28:07 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA29448; Thu, 20 May 1999 15:28:06 -0400 From: TonyProst@aol.com Message-ID: <16f39b7c.2475bd3d@aol.com> Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:32:13 EDT Subject: tc-list The Book at Issue To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 320 Lets talk about this book empirically. Is there an available book of superior quality? Is it useful to people at least to the point where these discrepancies make a difference to their research? Can they be corrected by an addendum? Regards, Tony Prost All Nonnos All Day http://members.aol.com/tonyprost/index.html From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 16:51:16 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA00509; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:51:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:55:21 -0500 (Central Daylight Time) From: "Prof. Ron Minton" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list Comforting solution In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990520142636.0066d100@highland.net> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: rminton@orions0.orion.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 440 On Thu, 20 May 1999, Jim West wrote: > Get Comfort's book. Its a treasure in spite of a few mistakes... Here is a comforting solution: Have Maurice Robinson do a thorough critique of the Comfort text and have Baker re-issue it (free to all who had to pay something for the trial edition). For his work, which will be as hard as putting together the original text, Baker will split the rewards to give Robinson one third. Ron Minton From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 16:59:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA01146; Thu, 20 May 1999 16:59:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 16:04:04 -0500 (Central Daylight Time) From: "Prof. Ron Minton" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990520142636.0066d100@highland.net> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: rminton@orions0.orion.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 391 On Thu, 20 May 1999, Jim West wrote: > Get Comfort's book. Its a treasure in spite of a few mistakes... > just as the Alexandrian texts far outweigh in value the Byzantine. Jim, Judging by the way you defended Comfort's book for its accurate copying, you should prefer the BYZ because its scribes seem much more careful and accurate copiers than the leading ALEX copies :) Ron Minton From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 18:06:02 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA01641; Thu, 20 May 1999 18:06:01 -0400 Message-ID: <374488F6.332E@total.net> Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 18:13:10 -0400 From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: TC-LIST@SHEMESH.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list Comfort's Book Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 277 Fellow TC-LISTers, Out of curiosity, does P. Comfort follow this list? Or can anyone reach him and kindly suggest that he temporarily join in and present his own case regarding the production of his own book, esp. the transcription of the mss?? just a thought Mike A. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 18:50:49 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA01785; Thu, 20 May 1999 18:50:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199905202250.SAA01780@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> From: "Dave Washburn" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 15:51:20 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Priority: normal In-reply-to: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2092 Jim, > >That's disturbing, isnt it. > > It is very distrubing. Equally disturbing is the notion that the baby > should be tossed out with the bathwater. My rather general statements about > the Byzantine mss are clearly inaccurate- as are all generalities. My point > in intentionally stating something so clearly inaccurate was to evoke a > mental image: if the Byz mss should not all be lumped together and > considered inaccurate for a few readings, why should Comfort's book? If > Bart doesn't like the introduction to the book- why does the rest of the > book thereby become worthless? If Comfort makes a few errors (I defy anyone > to find any manuscript of any book- ancient or modern, WITHOUT an error of > grammar, fact, or typography), then why should the whole of his book be > demonized as useless? The point is not whether the book has transcriptional errors; the point is that we don't know where they are, and a scholar who depends on a book with this kind of inaccuracies in it may, and probably will, end up with some erroneous conclusions that render all his/her work, if not useless, then severely flawed. As a researcher who uses reference works profusely, I naturally expect those works to have been proofread at least several times, checked against the primary sources, and corrected to the highest possible accuracy before being released on the unsuspecting research community. At the very least I expect an errata page to correct the errors that were discovered post-printing. If this hasn't been done then, yes, for all practical purposes it does render the book virtually unusable, because we don't know where the errors are or how badly they are going to affect what we're doing with the book. For those of us on a severely limited budget (i.e. me) this kind of book with this percentage of transcriptional errors would be, frankly, a poor investment. Knowing what I know from Maurice's post, I wouldn't give the book a second glance. Dave Washburn http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur A Bible that's falling apart means a life that isn't. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 18:52:38 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA01836; Thu, 20 May 1999 18:52:36 -0400 Message-Id: <199905202256.AAA27455@carno.brus.online.be> Subject: Re: tc-list The Book at Issue Date: Ven, 21 Mai 99 01:01:35 +0200 x-sender: vale5655@pop3.brus.online.be x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: Jean Valentin To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1164 >Lets talk about this book empirically. Is there an available book of >superior >quality? Is it useful to people at least to the point where these >discrepancies make a difference to their research? Can they be corrected = by >an addendum? > Many NT papyri have been edited separately. For example, I have here = the publication of P66 and P75 in the Bodmer series. There are also = editions of the Chester beatty papyri, some scraps of other papyri in = the Patrologia Orientalis. All those editions were made by serious = papyrologists: why not use them? And, as to the Bodmer editions, teh = edition is accompanied by photographic reproductions of those papyri, = which enables you to verify. Im' afraid I don't see the need for = anything other than that! Jean V. _______________________________________________________________ Jean Valentin - 34 rue du Berceau - 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique tel. 32-2-280.01.37 e-mail : jgvalentin@arcadis.be _______________________________________________________________ "Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop compliqu=E9 est = inutilisable" _______________________________________________________________ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 18:54:16 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA02352; Thu, 20 May 1999 18:54:15 -0400 Message-Id: <199905202258.AAA27483@carno.brus.online.be> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Date: Ven, 21 Mai 99 01:03:16 +0200 x-sender: vale5655@pop3.brus.online.be x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: Jean Valentin To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 684 >As I read a segment of your message I wondered if you >would elaborate upon the term "infallible" in relation to Biblical >literature and >also share your perspective on the concept of inspiration. OFF TOPIC!!! (Pls, I don't want my mailbox to be submerged by dogmatic discussions) Jean V. _______________________________________________________________ Jean Valentin - 34 rue du Berceau - 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique tel. 32-2-280.01.37 e-mail : jgvalentin@arcadis.be _______________________________________________________________ "Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop compliqu=E9 est = inutilisable" _______________________________________________________________ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 20 19:40:38 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA02502; Thu, 20 May 1999 19:40:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 18:46:17 -0500 From: Troy DeJongh To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Message-ID: <19990520184617.A28373@troyd.dgii.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> <199905202250.SAA01780@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.3i In-Reply-To: <199905202250.SAA01780@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu>; from Dave Washburn on Thu, May 20, 1999 at 03:51:20PM -0700 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2341 Dave Washburn wrote: > > The point is not whether the book has transcriptional errors; the > point is that we don't know where they are, and a scholar who > depends on a book with this kind of inaccuracies in it may, and > probably will, end up with some erroneous conclusions that render > all his/her work, if not useless, then severely flawed. As a > researcher who uses reference works profusely, I naturally expect > those works to have been proofread at least several times, checked > against the primary sources, and corrected to the highest possible > accuracy before being released on the unsuspecting research > community. At the very least I expect an errata page to correct the > errors that were discovered post-printing. If this hasn't been done > then, yes, for all practical purposes it does render the book virtually > unusable, because we don't know where the errors are or how > badly they are going to affect what we're doing with the book. For > those of us on a severely limited budget (i.e. me) this kind of book > with this percentage of transcriptional errors would be, frankly, a > poor investment. Knowing what I know from Maurice's post, I > wouldn't give the book a second glance. > > Dave Washburn > http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur In a way, this discussion reminds me of computer book publishing. Typically, very popular computer science texts with many source code examples are in their umpty-umth printing before 99% of the typos and errors are eliminated. Several prolific authors offer $1.00 per legitimate error/typo, plus an acknowledgement in the errata (either on the book's or author's web page or in the book itself). This seems like a good idea for publishing works like Comfort's as well, except for the fact that many scholarly volumes only _have_ one printing because of the significantly smaller audience. :-) On a slightly different note, I remember a time when I picked up a copy of Metzger's _The_Text_of_the_New_Testament:_Its_Transmission, _Corruption,_and_Restoration_ from my local Barnes and Noble, and I had to return it because every other page was missing in the first few chapters. The clerk at the return counter got a kick out of that, given the book's title. :-) -- Troy DeJongh http://pobox.com/~troyd From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 00:12:54 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id AAA03076; Fri, 21 May 1999 00:12:53 -0400 Message-ID: <024101bea340$fd79b980$46338cd1@servermain> From: "Nelson D. Roth" To: References: <199905202258.AAA27483@carno.brus.online.be> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 00:18:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 539 From: Jean Valentin To: Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 7:03 PM Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book > >As I read a segment of your message I wondered if you > >would elaborate upon the term "infallible" in relation to Biblical > >literature and > >also share your perspective on the concept of inspiration. > OFF TOPIC!!! > (Pls, I don't want my mailbox to be submerged by dogmatic discussions) > > Jean V. I was just wondering since you had initially mentioned it?! From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 02:12:28 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id CAA03557; Fri, 21 May 1999 02:12:27 -0400 Message-ID: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B29@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> From: "Bauer, Marc" To: "'tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu'" Subject: RE: tc-list Comfort's Book Let Comfort in (Rev. 3:20) Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 00:18:01 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 642 Yo! Signor e Signora Arcieri, Good idea. Jimmy, is Comfort an SBL'er as I? =A0 Shabbat Shalom, =A0 MARKWS GEORGIAS aka Marc Bauer =A0 =A0 -----Original Message----- From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri [ mailto:studium@total.net ] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 4:13 PM To: TC-LIST@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list Comfort's Book Fellow TC-LISTers, Out of curiosity, does P. Comfort follow this list? Or can anyone reach him and kindly suggest that he temporarily join in and present his own case regarding the production of his own book, esp. the transcription = of the mss?? just a thought Mike A. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 04:32:25 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id EAA04051; Fri, 21 May 1999 04:32:23 -0400 From: "Wieland Willker" To: "TC-List" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:35:49 +0200 Message-Id: <000101bea364$edaf5360$67566686@chemie.unibremen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 537 I think generally speaking a book like this is outdated. What we need is a transcription of the manuscripts in DIGITAL FORM. On a website (preferred) or on a CD. Improvements and corrections can then be made very easily. I think that these transcriptions are only of value if they are EXTREMELY accurate, otherwise you have to refer to the originals or photos. Best wishes Wieland -------------------- PS: I have transcriptions of the Egerton papyrus and the Secret Gospel of Mark at: http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/ww_tc.html From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 05:22:53 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id FAA05000; Fri, 21 May 1999 05:22:52 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 11:28:25 +0200 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu References: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B29@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's Book Let Comfort in (Rev. 3:20) X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Sender: 320003854441-0001@t-online.de From: U.B.Schmid@t-online.de (Dr. Ulrich Schmid) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1385 Bauer, Marc schrieb: > Yo! Signor e Signora Arcieri, > > Good idea. Jimmy, is Comfort an SBL'er as I? > >   > Shabbat Shalom, >   > MARKWS GEORGIAS aka Marc Bauer >   >   > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri [ mailto:studium@total.net > ] > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 4:13 PM > To: TC-LIST@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu > Subject: tc-list Comfort's Book > > > Fellow TC-LISTers, > > Out of curiosity, does P. Comfort follow this list? Or can anyone reach > him and kindly suggest that he temporarily join in and present his own > case regarding the production of his own book, esp. the transcription of > the mss?? > > > just a thought > > > Mike A. > > What's the use of having Comfort/Barrett presenting their case on this list? (Of course, they can do; no censorship intended). They had ample space to present their case in the book they published. Now it's up to the public to evaluate the merits and the shortcomings of their work. At least that's the way it used to be before the invention of electronically mediated (scholarly, literary, artistic, etc.) discussions. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I feel uncomfortable too having a painter explaining what he or she REALLY wanted to depict/convey/articulate/deconstruct, etc. ------------------------------------------ Dr. Ulrich Schmid U.B.Schmid@t-online.de From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 10:23:41 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA06760; Fri, 21 May 1999 10:23:40 -0400 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:38:53 -0500 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: JOxford@net1plus.com (Jim Oxford) Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's Book Let Comfort in (Rev. 3:20) Cc: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1066 At 4:28 5/21/99, Dr. Ulrich Schmid wrote: >What's the use of having Comfort/Barrett presenting their case on this list? >(Of course, they can do; no censorship intended). They had ample space to >present their case in the book they published. Now it's up to the public to >evaluate the merits and the shortcomings of their work. At least that's >the way >it used to be before the invention of electronically mediated (scholarly, >literary, artistic, etc.) discussions. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I feel >uncomfortable too having a painter explaining what he or she REALLY wanted to >depict/convey/articulate/deconstruct, etc. > > > >------------------------------------------ >Dr. Ulrich Schmid >U.B.Schmid@t-online.de Dr. Schmid, I believe that any time someone who has just published something is called "brainless," that particular individual does indeed have the right to defend himself/herself in the venue in which such ad hominem comments were made. Regards, Jim Oxford, Jr. Jim Oxford Ph D candidate in NT Baylor University joxford@net1plus.com From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 12:33:41 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA08126; Fri, 21 May 1999 12:33:40 -0400 Message-ID: <374582A2.8868C8C2@historian.net> Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:58:28 -0500 From: Jack Kilmon X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's Book Let Comfort in (Rev. 3:20) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2088 Jim Oxford wrote: > At 4:28 5/21/99, Dr. Ulrich Schmid wrote: > > >What's the use of having Comfort/Barrett presenting their case on this list? > >(Of course, they can do; no censorship intended). They had ample space to > >present their case in the book they published. Now it's up to the public to > >evaluate the merits and the shortcomings of their work. At least that's > >the way > >it used to be before the invention of electronically mediated (scholarly, > >literary, artistic, etc.) discussions. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I feel > >uncomfortable too having a painter explaining what he or she REALLY wanted to > >depict/convey/articulate/deconstruct, etc. > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------ > >Dr. Ulrich Schmid > >U.B.Schmid@t-online.de > > Dr. Schmid, > > I believe that any time someone who has just published something is called > "brainless," that particular individual does indeed have the right to > defend himself/herself in the venue in which such ad hominem comments were > made. I think the criticism of Comfort's book may be exaggerated. Is this book focussed entirely on aspects of TC which IS concerned with minor transcriptional errors? As an "informed" layman and not a textual scholar, an opus that covers the earliest mss in one work is a valuable resource. I had no idea that P4, P64 and P67 likely came from the same codex. As a tolerable palaeographer, I am able to examine the scripts of these mss in one work rather than dozens of separate treatments. If there are transcriptional errors such as a double eta, rather a transcriptional, editorial or printer's error, it seems to me a subsequent publication of an errata will correct the problems. I think the bolder approach to dating is refreshing and appears to be well substantiated against other texts. This ability to compare the scripts of various mss in one opus is extremely informative to me. Jack -- ______________________________________________ taybutheh d'maran yeshua masheecha am kulkon Jack Kilmon jkilmon@historian.net http://www.historian.net From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 12:34:46 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA08151; Fri, 21 May 1999 12:34:45 -0400 Message-ID: <37458C76.77F8@total.net> Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 12:40:22 -0400 From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list Comfort's book... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2167 Dr. Ulrich, > Dr. Ulrich Schmid wrote: > > What's the use of having Comfort/Barrett presenting their case on this list? > (Of course, they can do; no censorship intended). They had ample space to > present their case in the book they published. Now it's up to the public to > evaluate the merits and the shortcomings of their work. Although I agree with you, allow me to explain further. C/B had all the time (I suppose) to verify the accuracy of their transcriptions before publication, to make sure that their 'house was in order.' If they failed to review their own work and now are being chastised for mistakes, it is well deserved. However, my suggestion was along the lines of 'fair play' within this present discussion, in inviting Comfort or Barrett to present their case before us fellow textual critics, ESPECIALLY in light of the critique that Robinson presented! I find his comments have quite seriously underminded the value and/or reliability of C/B's book (as already mentioned, it was a number of questions raised about the accuracy of Merk that made text critics uneasy about using his NT, and it was (again) multiple accusations of innacuracy that prevented S.C.E. Legg's edition of "Luke" from ever being published). There are cases in which a book is published, it is reviewed in a journal, and later the author himself writes a 'rejoinder' to the same journal, either acknowledging the errata discovered, or clarifying his position if it has been misunderstood by the reviewer in question. Since the TC-LIST is now handling this hot potato, I would have liked for Comfort to join in and comment: does he agree with Robinson? Did he and Barrett themselves do all the transcriptions, or did their students do the work? How was the proofreading done? Actually, I agree with both Dave Washburn and Jean Valentine: since the book has errors and I have to re-examine all transcriptions myself in order to have some confidence AND since accurate transcriptions are already available (done by expert papyrologists), then _why_ whould I use the C/B volume in the first place? Convenience?? just another thought ;-) ;-) Mike A. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 23:25:53 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA12305; Fri, 21 May 1999 23:25:51 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comforting solution Message-ID: <19990521.232439.4495.4.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,2-6,8-11,16-17,20-26 From: M A Robinson Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:30:08 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1174 On Thu, 20 May 1999 15:55:21 -0500 (Central Daylight Time) "Prof. Ron Minton" writes: >On Thu, 20 May 1999, Jim West wrote: >Here is a comforting solution: Have Maurice Robinson do a thorough >critique of the Comfort text and have Baker re-issue it (free to all >who had to pay something for the trial edition). For his work, which will >be as hard as putting together the original text, Baker will split the >rewards to give Robinson one third. Thank you for the suggestion, Ron, but I will demur, since there is no time available for such an extensive project, and insufficient inclination to do such (though a list of errata may well be limited enough so as not to become a major publishing burden if issued as a supplement, should anyone be inclined to compile such) . I do suspect Baker will _not_ be inclined to offer any free reissues to anyone, however, especially with a limited and specialist-oriented market for this book. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA. From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 23:25:56 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA12311; Fri, 21 May 1999 23:25:54 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list The Book at Issue Message-ID: <19990521.232439.4495.2.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <16f39b7c.2475bd3d@aol.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-5,10-11,13-14,18-21,24-30 From: M A Robinson Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:30:08 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1245 On Thu, 20 May 1999 15:32:13 EDT TonyProst@aol.com writes: >Lets talk about this book empirically. Is there an available book of >superior quality? The transcriptions of the _editio princeps_ scattered in various volumes are of course useful. But for the papyri of John, the IGNTP volume is clearly the source to which to turn. Also the Muenster volumes for the Epistles on papyrus are the best source. All these of course are much more expensive than the C/B volume. > Is it useful to people at least to the point where these discrepancies make a > difference to their research? C/B can be used as a rough (and generally [98%] accurate) guide to the text and contents of any MS cited therein. Just be careful not to cite any reading as that of a given MS without confirming such in another source. >Can they be corrected by an addendum? This of course is possible, and I alluded to that in my comments. Whether anyone will be inclined to go over C/B with the proverbial fine-tooth comb and compile such a list is another matter. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 23:26:52 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA12332; Fri, 21 May 1999 23:26:51 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Message-ID: <19990521.232440.4495.6.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-7,15-34,36,45-46,51-58 From: M A Robinson Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:30:08 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3115 On Thu, 20 May 1999 12:27:26 -0400 Jim West writes: >If Bart doesn't like the introduction to the book- why does the rest of >the book thereby become worthless? > why should the whole of his book be demonized as useless? It is not a matter of "like", but of facts versus errors. The case obviously becomes cumulative if there are clear errors of fact in the introduction as well as clearly identified errors in the transcriptions. The errors in the introduction might not nullify the transcriptions, nor would the errors in the transcriptions nullify the introduction. But when a pattern of error tends to emerge in both cases, I would have serious concerns about the accuracy of the whole. To this end Dave Washburn's concise summary statement is quite well expressed: >The point is not whether the book has transcriptional errors; the >point is that we don't know where they are, and a scholar who >depends on a book with this kind of inaccuracies in it may, and >probably will, end up with some erroneous conclusions that render >all his/her work, if not useless, then severely flawed. As a >researcher who uses reference works profusely, I naturally expect >those works to have been proofread at least several times, checked >against the primary sources, and corrected to the highest possible >accuracy before being released on the unsuspecting research >community. At the very least I expect an errata page to correct the >errors that were discovered post-printing. If this hasn't been done >then, yes, for all practical purposes it does render the book virtually >unusable, because we don't know where the errors are or how >badly they are going to affect what we're doing with the book. For >those of us on a severely limited budget (i.e. me) this kind of book >with this percentage of transcriptional errors would be, frankly, a >poor investment. On a positive note, let me say there are two good uses to which this book can be put: (1) It will serve excellently in the classroom as a tool by which to train beginning collators before they tackle the more difficult-to-decipher photographs first-hand. The book does reflect the scribal habits which appear in the MSS themselves, with extra errors from C/B typical of the same types of scribal blunder. So long as no one uses the book to make "exact" collations of an ancient MS and then use those results as sufficient to establish a reading, then no harm will be done (the danger is that this is precisely what most people will assume the book is intended for). (2) Students also can then be asked to collate the text against the photographs or _editio princeps_ of the various MSS and compile a list of all the differences between C/B and the actual MSS or editor's original readings. Eventually this would result in the deisred list of errata necessary for proper scholarly use of the volume. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 21 23:26:58 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA12346; Fri, 21 May 1999 23:26:57 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Message-ID: <19990521.232440.4495.7.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990520114541.00671f48@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-7,9,12-13,15-16,20-21,23-26,29-30,32-33,35-36, 38-42,47-53,55-56,63-64,66-69,76-77,79-81,87-88,95-98,103-106, 108,110-112,114,116-118,124-132 From: M A Robinson Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 23:30:08 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 5897 On Thu, 20 May 1999 07:45:41 -0400 Jim West writes: >At 09:30 AM 5/20/99 +0200, you wrote: >The ms I examined were different than those looked at by Maurice. My >main interest is the "major papyri". When I looked at those I did not >discover the egregious errors pointed out by Maurice. I would consider P66 and P75 "major papyri," and I did point out C/B errors in regard to those MSS as well. There are other errors which still could be listed, though I deliberately kept the list to a minimum. Add to the list if you like a few more examples from "major papyri": P66 - Jn. 3:2 (leaf 6 verso, line 5): C/B read hO QU [sic!], but the photo clearly shows the normal hO QS. P66 - Jn 7:41 regarding ELEGON, 2nd occurrence: note in C/B mentions first corrector adding ELE supra linea, but fail to notice that 2nd corrector erased the ELE in that position and inserted it into the main line of text\ when changing the ALLOI {ELE}GON into OI DE ELEGON. P66 - Jn 13:23, hO IS -- C/B fail to note that hO is supplied by a corrector who squeezed it in tightly between HGAPA and IS. P66 - Jn 13:30 - C/B EXHLQEN in photo appears to be EXELQEIN (sic). P66 - Jn 13:34, C/B read INA KAI, while photo shows clearly INA K/ (K with slash as abbreviation for KAI, which C/B normally note with a specific character). P46 - Col. 2:1 C/B have EORAKAN TO PROSWPON MOU, while the photo clearly has EORAKAN MOU TO PROSWPON MOU. P90 - Jn 19:3 (verso, line 5) C/B have HR]X[ONTO PROS AU, while it should be HR]X[ON]TO PROS AU, since the photo clearly shows TO PROS AU present. How many more examples of error in the C/B volume are necessary to establish the point? >Perhaps C/B were more focused on the more interesting papyri while >spending less time on the others. Who knows but them. Even were this the case (and it isn't, since in line with their theories, C/B consider all pre-4th century papyri as important and thus "interesting"), there is no excuse for errors in a book which purports by its very nature to give an exact transcript of the text of the earliest MSS of the NT. >In any event, I do think that Maurice is being a little hard on them. Hard? I would prefer the terms "fair" and "precise". >Percentage wise the C/B book contains less scribal errors than most of >the Byzantine mss---- and yet Maurice seems to have no problem with them. Apples and oranges; irrelevant and non-sequitur. The nature of the aggregate Byzantine Textform has no relation to this point. Were I intending to produce an exact and accurate transcript of any single Byzantine MS, it had better be _exact_ or my transcription would lose all credibility. I would have had precisely the same criticism had C/B produced a book containing erroneous transcriptions of several 12th-century Byzantine MSS. >For example- the C/B book contains much more accurate transcriptions than >it does inaccurate- but Maurice doe not bother to point these out. In >fact, the bulk, the vast majority of the book is quite accurate. I noted that at least 98% of the book was exactly correct. The problem is that _you_, the reader, has to guess which parts belong to that 98% and which do not. Without comparison against the photographs or _editio princeps_, I can not discern which parts are accurate. I do know that unless I compare every line against some other source, I cannot be certain at any given point that C/B have reproduced accurately the precise text of any given MS. >So perhaps something else is afoot here in Maurice's comments? It is well known >that Comfort and Robinson do not see eye to eye... Unless you have stopped beating your wife, Jim, I would avoid _ad hominem_ imputation of motives. Most modern eclectics (reasoned and rigorous) would differ sharply from Comfort's theory, methodology, and text-critical preferences (which he has espoused strongly in several previous publications); but all this is irrelevant to the point at issue. Had this book been _accurate_ (as I had hoped it would from all the pre-publication blurbs) in those places where I did my initial spot checks, I would have praised it as strongly as you did initially, and it would have been a welcome resource for the textual critic of whatever persuasion. The book instead had egregious errors scattered throughout as I reported (as well as others such as those listed above which were not mentioned in my brief comments). >Certainly it is no dishonor to make errors. Most of us do. Sorry to differ, but in a work which purports to present an exact transcript of specific MSS, the errors _do_ matter. The Westcott-Hort text cannot be used as an exact transcript of Codex Vaticanus, even though there may only be a few hundred differences between the two, probably less than 2%.. You wrote to Ulrich, >My point has been missed. My point is this- the Byzantine family of mss is, >on the whole, less reliable than the Alexandrian- just as the majority of >Comfort's book is reliable, in spite of the few errors. > My point in intentionally stating something so clearly inaccurate was to > evoke a mental image: if the Byz mss should not all be lumped together and > considered inaccurate for a few readings, why should Comfort's book? Following your analogy, since the Byzantine Textform and the Alexandrian MSS tend to agree on approximately 90% of their text, you would have no problem using the Byzantine Textform exclusively for all your research and study, since for the vast majority of the text we both agree that 100% agreement with the original exists, and a small amount of "inaccuracy" really doesn't matter, correct? Of course not. I stand by my initial comments. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 09:01:52 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA14276; Sat, 22 May 1999 09:01:51 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19990521.232440.4495.6.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990520162726.00698e94@highland.net> Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 08:08:24 -0500 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Robert B. Waltz" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 975 On 5/21/99, M A Robinson wrote, in part: >(2) Students also can then be asked to collate the text against the >photographs or _editio princeps_ of the various MSS and compile a list of >all the differences between C/B and the actual MSS or editor's original >readings. Eventually this would result in the deisred list of errata >necessary for proper scholarly use of the volume. This brings up the strong suggestion that somebody make up a web site containing these lists of corrections. As noted, the good thing about this volume is its compact collection of all the data. By supplying a compact collection of errata, we might actually make it useful. :-) -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Robert B. Waltz waltzmn@skypoint.com 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 owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 14:18:02 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA15521; Sat, 22 May 1999 14:18:01 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 20:19:05 +0200 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu References: <37458C76.77F8@total.net> Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... X-Mailer: T-Online eMail 2.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Sender: 320003854441-0001@t-online.de From: U.B.Schmid@t-online.de (U.B.Schmid) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 4977 Mike Arcieri wrote: > Dr. Ulrich, > > > > Dr. Ulrich Schmid wrote: > > > > What's the use of having Comfort/Barrett presenting their case on this list? > > (Of course, they can do; no censorship intended). They had ample space to > > present their case in the book they published. Now it's up to the public to > > evaluate the merits and the shortcomings of their work. > > Although I agree with you, allow me to explain further. > > C/B had all the time (I suppose) to verify the accuracy of their > transcriptions before > publication, to make sure that their 'house was in order.' If they > failed to review their own > work and now are being chastised for mistakes, it is well deserved. > However, my suggestion was > along the lines of 'fair play' within this present discussion, in > inviting Comfort or Barrett to > present their case before us fellow textual critics, ESPECIALLY in light > of the critique that > Robinson presented! I find his comments have quite seriously underminded > the value and/or > reliability of C/B's book (as already mentioned, it was a number of > questions raised about the > accuracy of Merk that made text critics uneasy about using his NT, and > it was (again) multiple > accusations of innacuracy that prevented S.C.E. Legg's edition of "Luke" > from ever being > published). > > There are cases in which a book is published, it is reviewed in a > journal, and later the author > himself writes a 'rejoinder' to the same journal, either acknowledging > the errata discovered, or > clarifying his position if it has been misunderstood by the reviewer in > question. Two points on that: 1) I agree, there are cases when reviews get reviewed again by the author of the first publication. I would prefer however to get the first publication before I get the 'rejoinder'. In other words: I don't think in this case that the time is ripe for calling the authors in. 2) If it were a publication with a strong and/or complicated theses that could be missed or misrepresented or the like, I would be less hesitant to consult the author(s) at an early stage of the discussion. So far however we did not discuss any theory, but the reliability of transcriptions (or the lack thereof). In other words: Facts not opinion. Thus, interpretation is not necessary. > Since the > TC-LIST is now handling this hot potato, I would have liked for Comfort > to join in and comment: > does he agree with Robinson? Did he and Barrett themselves do all the > transcriptions, or did > their students do the work? How was the proofreading done? >From point 2) above it follows quite naturally that there is not much to agree or disagree with, the sole exception being reconstructions of dammaged leafs, lacunae, erasures, hands and that sort of tricky stuff, where occasionally disagreement is legitimate. Again, what is the use of having answers to all the other questions? It won't change the printed result. Jim Oxford, Jr. wrote: >I believe that any time someone who has just published something is called >"brainless," that particular individual does indeed have the right to >defend himself/herself in the venue in which such ad hominem comments were >made. I agree. But even this rude "qualification" of one of the authors by an individual on this list won't change the quality of the book under discussion. This is, after all, my main concern. To put things into (my) perspective. So far the only statistics I can come up with is Maurice's list of errors drawn from MS 0189v (BTW-- 2nd/3rd centuries!). Everyone who can get hold of K.Aland/B.Aland, The Text of the NT should find a photograph of this page (in the 2nd *German* edition it is p. 115). It is, admittedly, a little bit difficult to read, but that's not unusual with manuscripts of that age and that level of preservation. Given the fact that Maurice correctly rendered the C/B transcription I have to say that he is basically right in pointing out the five errors when compared to the photograph (The only thing I'm not quite sure about is whether in line 22 Q[YRAS] the theta is completely visible or only three quarters of it). Thus, in total we find (at least) five transcription errors from one page of a manuscript that has 32 lines with around 26 characters per line covering roughly 10 verses of NT text. This sample is, in my mind, not large enough for serious statistics but large enough for serious concern. Maurice did a fine job to alert us regarding the C/B book. Given the fact that he gave more examples of bad transcriptions, which should be verified and put into statistical perspectives, I'm inclined to anticipate more concern. However, I would like to ask those who own a copy of the C/B book (or can get hold of one) to do similar spot checks in order to contribute to a statistically more appropriate *empirical* data base. ------------------------------------------ Dr. Ulrich Schmid U.B.Schmid@t-online.de From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 14:34:58 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id OAA15576; Sat, 22 May 1999 14:34:57 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 11:36:45 -0700 Subject: tc-list Comfort vs. Ruben Swanson From: "clayton stirling bartholomew" To: TC list Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19990522184041.DEND14725@[12.73.97.73]> Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 886 I suspect that one kind of transcription problem will crop up regularly in the: > Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts. > By Philip W. Comfort. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998. Comfort seems to accept partial letters that amount to no more than a few molecules of ink clinging to the edge of the broke fragment. Two examples can be found in P39 where in the first two lines of the verso (John 8:14 ff) Comfort reads partial letters (alpha) which Ruben Swanson does not accept as partial letters. What Comfort accepts as a partial alpha in the first line (see photo) does not seem to exist at all. The second line is probably more debatable. My question is really about Ruben Swanson. Are his works on the Gospels and Acts reliable or are they in the same ball park with Comfort/Barrett? -- Clayton Stirling Bartholomew Three Tree Point P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062 From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:10:06 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA15691; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:10:05 -0400 Message-ID: <04f201bea47f$51b26440$e9b91ed1@dcc-1> From: "Perry L. Stepp" To: Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort vs. Ruben Swanson Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:14:34 -0400 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 589 >My question is really about Ruben Swanson. Are his works on the Gospels >and Acts reliable or are they in the same ball park with >Comfort/Barrett? At some point, Vincent Broman (is Vincent still on the list?) checked samples of Swanson against the NA27 and Tischendorf 8th. His general impression was that Swanson's volumes were slightly less accurate than the other two, but still quite reliable. I wish I could find the exact figures and procedure he used. I can't remember if he described them in a private note to me, or in his review of Swanson in the TC Journal. PLStepp From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:15:20 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA15732; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:15:19 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:20:42 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522192042.00682814@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 932 At 08:19 PM 5/22/99 +0200, you wrote: >Maurice did a fine job to alert us regarding the C/B book. Given the fact that >he gave more examples of bad transcriptions, which should be verified and put >into statistical perspectives, I'm inclined to anticipate more concern. >However, I would like to ask those who own a copy of the C/B book (or can get >hold of one) to do similar spot checks in order to contribute to a statistically >more appropriate *empirical* data base. I offered a number of passages, chosen at random, where C/B's transcription was 100% accurate. Yet, for some reason, these texts have been brushed aside. Evidently some are only interested in the minor number of errors while willing to overlook the many passages where correct transcription has occured. Have you taken account of those? Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:17:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA15755; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:17:58 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:23:02 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort vs. Ruben Swanson X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522192302.00681fe0@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1049 At 11:36 AM 5/22/99 -0700, you wrote: >Comfort seems to accept partial letters that amount to no more than a >few molecules of ink clinging to the edge of the broke fragment. Two >examples can be found in P39 where in the first two lines of the verso >(John 8:14 ff) Comfort reads partial letters (alpha) which Ruben Swanson >does not accept as partial letters. What Comfort accepts as a partial >alpha in the first line (see photo) does not seem to exist at all. The >second line is probably more debatable. The problem here is that we do not know what ms you are using, Ruben used, or Comfort used. Have you considered the possibility that his exemplar is superior to yours or Ruben's? > >My question is really about Ruben Swanson. Are his works on the Gospels >and Acts reliable or are they in the same ball park with >Comfort/Barrett? This rather negative (and I might add mildly pejorative) judegment seems premature. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:25:00 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA15790; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:24:59 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:30:49 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: tc-list Comfort on John 1:1-12, p75 X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522193049.00687b3c@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 288 Of these 22 lines of text, averaging 8 words each line, C/B's transcription is 100% accurate and in agreement with P75. Add these stats to the statistical database. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:36:14 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA15944; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:36:13 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:41:39 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: tc-list Comfort on P12 X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522194139.0068010c@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 834 P12- heb 1:1, consists of 3 lines of badly preserved text. I have, on my desk, the very excellent transcription of Toshio Hirunuma, "The Papyri Bearing the New Testament Text" (Osaka Christian Bookshop: 1994) (by the by, he offers photos and transcriptions of P1- P45 complete- only drawback- the non greek text is in Japanese- but this is an EXCELLENT book!!!) Anyway, this is the photo I am using to compare p12 in C/B. On the second line, 15th letter, Hirunuma has "gamma" while C/B have "tau". The photo, so far as I can tell using magnification, has "tau". Gamma, apparently, makes no sense here, whereas tau certainly does. 100% accurate transcription by C/B on P12. Another sample for the database. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:52:32 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA16037; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:52:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199905221958.PAA01366@pike.sover.net> Comments: SoVerNet Verification (on pike.sover.net) newdell from st232.virt.sover.net [207.136.205.232] 207.136.205.232 Sat, 22 May 1999 15:58:15 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: nichael@sover.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:01:31 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: Nichael Lynn Cramer Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort on P12 Cc: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990522194139.0068010c@highland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1193 Jim West wrote: >P12- heb 1:1, consists of 3 lines of badly preserved text. I have, on my >desk, the very excellent transcription of Toshio Hirunuma, "The Papyri >Bearing the New Testament Text" (Osaka Christian Bookshop: 1994) (by the by, >he offers photos and transcriptions of P1- P45 complete- only drawback- the >non greek text is in Japanese- but this is an EXCELLENT book!!!) > >Anyway, this is the photo I am using to compare p12 in C/B. > >On the second line, 15th letter, Hirunuma has "gamma" while C/B have "tau". >The photo, so far as I can tell using magnification, has "tau". Gamma, >apparently, makes no sense here, whereas tau certainly does. Jim Having not yet seen the book, let me ask a question (that I've asked about three times before, but never recieved an answer): Using this specific example, how does C/B signify this problematic reading (i.e. gamma vs tau) in his transcription? (You may well be correct that only "tau" make sense. It is, however, as you point out still a reconstructed reading and needs to be noted as such.) Thanks Nichael --- Nichael Cramer nichael@sover.net nulla dies sine linea http://www.sover.net/~nichael/ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 15:58:58 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA16080; Sat, 22 May 1999 15:58:57 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:04:13 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: tc-list P5 from C/B X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522200413.006767a8@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 854 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- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 16:20:50 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA16215; Sat, 22 May 1999 16:20:48 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:26:32 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort on P12 X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522202632.0068be2c@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 655 At 04:01 PM 5/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >Having not yet seen the book, let me ask a question (that I've asked about >three times before, but never recieved an answer): > >Using this specific example, how does C/B signify this problematic reading >(i.e. gamma vs tau) in his transcription? questionable letters or words are in brackets- unclear letters or words have a dot under them- in other words, the standard method of marking questionable readings. Their system of notation is no different than any other I have seen utilized. Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 16:21:42 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA16232; Sat, 22 May 1999 16:21:41 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.19990522132855.007f5100@mail.teleport.com> X-Sender: dalemw@mail.teleport.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 13:28:55 -0700 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Dale M. Wheeler" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1293 Mike Arcieri wrote: >C/B had all the time (I suppose) to verify the accuracy of their >transcriptions before >publication, to make sure that their 'house was in order.' If they >failed to review their own >work and now are being chastised for mistakes, it is well deserved. > It was my understanding that the book's release was delayed (twice?) precisely because one or more of the pre-pub reviewers/editors had discovered the same types of errors that Maurice found, and that is was sent back to Comfort, et.al., to be fixed, ie., the papyri were supposed to be re-examined/transcriptions corrected. So either someone decided to turn it loose finally without a complete rechecking or this *is* the rechecked version. In any case, someone has dropped the ball on this project, which given the easily identifiable errors in the transcriptions, should have exhibited virtual perfection. XAIREIN... *********************************************************************** Dale M. Wheeler, Ph.D. Research Professor in Biblical Languages Multnomah Bible College 8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220 Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail: dalemw@teleport.com *********************************************************************** From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 16:47:46 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA16294; Sat, 22 May 1999 16:47:45 -0400 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19990521.232440.4495.7.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990520114541.00671f48@highland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 15:56:18 -0500 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: Carlton Winbery Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1425 Maurice replied to this bit of tripe; >>So perhaps something else is afoot here in Maurice's comments? It is >well known >>that Comfort and Robinson do not see eye to eye... > >Unless you have stopped beating your wife, Jim, I would avoid _ad >hominem_ imputation of motives. Most modern eclectics (reasoned and >rigorous) would differ sharply from Comfort's theory, methodology, and >text-critical preferences (which he has espoused strongly in several >previous publications); but all this is irrelevant to the point at issue. > What we have gotten from Maurice is an informative look at the problems that make a purported "exact transcription" of some important mss useless if used by itself in an effort to establish the text. He, as always, cites exact evidence and has drawn a clear conclusion from it that cannot be ignored. As far as making a list of errata to make the book useful in all phases of TC, why should anyone do that? It falls to the authors and publishers to furnish such a list if they want us to use their book. If anyone were to go to that much trouble, they could more easily publish their own book without the weight of the problems in this one. Thanks again to Maurice for using his capabilities to inform us all. Dr. Carlton L. Winbery Foggleman Professor of Religion Louisiana College winbery@andria.lacollege.edu winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net Ph. 1 318 448 6103 hm Ph. 1 318 487 7241 off From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 17:00:13 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA16351; Sat, 22 May 1999 17:00:12 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 17:05:44 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522210544.00688854@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1762 At 01:28 PM 5/22/99 -0700, you wrote: In any case, someone has dropped the ball on this project, which >given the easily identifiable errors in the transcriptions, should have >exhibited virtual perfection. Um- you mean like the virtual perfection evidenced in the harmony displayed between the 5200 odd manuscripts of the Greek New Testament? Wonder who can be blamed for "dropping the ball" on the preservation and transmission of the Biblical text...... (so much for inspiration and "overseeing of the transmission" of that inspired Urtext) > >XAIREIN... Again, in spite of the numerous examples cited by me- totalling, word count wise- far more than Maurice's examples of errors, folk insist on dismissing the book. Why? How was the "ball dropped"? What on earth do y'all have against Comfort's work? In all honesty, from Maurice, to Bart, to Bob, there seems to be an almost intentional effort to undermine and disparage Comfort's work. Is it because his views on the importance of early mss leaves you a tad disgruntled? But that does not invalidate everything the guy does. I am really starting to think that there is simply here some measure of academic blackballing going on. Macarthyism in Biblical Textual Criticism. Who woulda thought it. In spite of the minor criticisms offered by Maurice (outweighed, as far as I am concerned by the very fine work that characterizes the volume as a whole), I maintain that this book is very useful. Macarthyism notwithstanding. So, I conclude my participation in this string. I look forward to hearing what others say- as I have already said enough (and maybe too much). Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 17:05:08 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA16379; Sat, 22 May 1999 17:05:07 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 17:09:56 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990522210956.00695b38@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1254 At 03:56 PM 5/22/99 -0500, you wrote: >What we have gotten from Maurice is an informative look at the problems >that make a purported "exact transcription" of some important mss useless >if used by itself in an effort to establish the text. He, as always, cites >exact evidence and has drawn a clear conclusion from it that cannot be >ignored. As far as making a list of errata to make the book useful in all >phases of TC, why should anyone do that? It falls to the authors and >publishers to furnish such a list if they want us to use their book. If >anyone were to go to that much trouble, they could more easily publish >their own book without the weight of the problems in this one. > >Thanks again to Maurice for using his capabilities to inform us all. > Carlton has obviously chosen to ignore, for whatever reason, the evidence of Comfort's competence that I have been offering for a bit now. Why? And be sure, I am not impunging your motives or the like. I am asking an honest question. So please answer. What do you make of the places where Comfort has accurately transcribed the text? Why dont yo mention those examples? Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 17:10:54 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA16425; Sat, 22 May 1999 17:10:53 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 14:13:40 -0700 Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort on P12 ?WHAT DOTS? From: "clayton stirling bartholomew" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19990522211637.EHIO14725@[12.73.96.210]> Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 608 JIM, > questionable letters or words are in brackets- unclear letters or words have > a dot under them- in other words, the standard method of marking > questionable readings. Their system of notation is no different than any > other I have seen utilized. Are you describing C/B here? Where are the DOTS? Did you get a different edition than I did. Comfort states in the introduction that he is not using dots to mark questionable letters because of the typesetting problems. There are not DOTS under letters in my copy. -- Clayton Stirling Bartholomew Three Tree Point P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062 From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 17:17:26 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA16460; Sat, 22 May 1999 17:17:25 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990522192042.00682814@highland.net> Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 16:26:11 -0500 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Robert B. Waltz" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2211 On 5/22/99, Jim West wrote: >I offered a number of passages, chosen at random, where C/B's transcription >was 100% accurate. Yet, for some reason, these texts have been brushed >aside. Evidently some are only interested in the minor number of errors >while willing to overlook the many passages where correct transcription has >occured. >Have you taken account of those? It's a statistical thing. One error has more significance than one correct reading. We can take actual numbers. Suppose someone finds one error in ten readings -- i.e. nine of ten are right. That's 90% accurate. Now suppose we add one more reading. If it's right, then C/B is accurate in ten of eleven, or 91%. But if it's wrong, then C/B is accurate in nine of eleven, or 82%. So each *error* hurts much more than each accurate reading helps. Particularly since our goal is probably 95% to be accurate at points of disagreement, and 99% accurate overall. Based on Robinson's data, we need some hundreds of accurate passages to make this an acceptably accurate book. Of course, what we *really* need is for someone to sit down with actual photos and check large quantities of text from several different papyri. Presumably someone will do this at one point, but I doubt there has been time yet. As I said before, I don't have the data to actually know whether C/B is accurate. I would need the sort of test described above to be certain. However, *because* errors have so much more weight than accurate readings, I *tentatively* incline to distrust C/B, and to agree with its critics. I will not buy it until an objective test offers evidence that the problems Robinson found are merely isolated errors (as opposed to a consistent problem). And, btw, if it be asked if I am prepared to sacrifice everything on the altar of statistics -- the answer is an assured *yes*! If it's not statistical, it's not science. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Robert B. Waltz waltzmn@skypoint.com 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 owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 18:22:55 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA16587; Sat, 22 May 1999 18:22:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199905222228.SAA19356@garnet.sover.net> Comments: SoVerNet Verification (on garnet.sover.net) newdell from st232.virt.sover.net [207.136.205.232] 207.136.205.232 Sat, 22 May 1999 18:28:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: nichael@sover.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 18:32:13 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: Nichael Lynn Cramer Subject: Cold Comfort [was: tc-list Comfort's book...] Cc: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990522210544.00688854@highland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1923 Jim West wrote: > ... What on earth do y'all have >against Comfort's work? In all honesty, from Maurice, to Bart, to Bob, >there seems to be an almost intentional effort to undermine and disparage >Comfort's work. Speaking as essentially an by-stander here, then let me ask the obvious question, Jim. Why do you seem to be so hell-bent on pushing Comfort's book? The simply fact is that no one has simply "disparged" or "undermined" Comfort's book. Rather several major scholars in the field have pointed to what are apparently very serious problems with the book. Problems which, quite frankly, you have yet to seriously address. Bart Ehrman pointed to several "egregious historical errors" in the introduction to the book; this you dismissed as Prof Ehrman "not liking" the introduction. A great many transcriptional errors have been pointed out. Rather than addressing this point you have, amazingly enough, simply pointed to places where errors haven't been made! ("No, I assure your Eminence, parts of it are excellent." ;-) In short, no one has doubted that were this book what it purposes to be, then it would be an extremely valuable resource. The only question is, _is_ this that book? The simple fact of the matter is this: If a books such as this can serve _any_ purpose, it is that it represents a source which can be turned to by those who do not have access to the original manuscripts (or reliable facsimiles). And given that, for a book such as this, anything less than darn near perfect simply is not, like it or not, good enough. > ... [embarassing references to Macarthyism deleted]... Jim, ol'-net-buddy, I'm sorry, but this is getting silly. Your contributions to the various list have always been of great help to me and, I'm sure, others. This sort of nonsense is, quite frankly, unworthy of you. Nichael -- Nichael Cramer nichael@sover.net http://www.sover.net/~nichael/ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 20:40:09 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA16852; Sat, 22 May 1999 20:40:08 -0400 From: "Matthew Anstey" To: "Miqra" , "B-Hebrew" , "Hebraisticum" , "TC-List" Subject: tc-list Enclitic Mems Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 17:45:24 -0700 Message-ID: <001101bea4b5$8bf249a0$2f8257ce@concept> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 467 Gday all, SIL (Summer Institute of Linguistics) is working on some new software for Bible translators and we need some help in finding all the enclitic mems in the MT. Does anybody have a list of all the verses with enclitic mems, preferably subdivided into 'definite,' 'probable,' and 'perhaps'? So far we only have the 7 examples given in Waltke & O'Connor (section 9.8). Much thanks in advance. You can send it to me off-list. Matthew Anstey manstey@portal.ca From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 21:23:31 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA17568; Sat, 22 May 1999 21:23:30 -0400 Message-ID: <37475871.534CEBE1@mailhost.chi.ameritech.net> Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 20:22:58 -0500 From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Biblical Greek CC: graphai , historical_jesus , ioudaios-l , TC-List Subject: tc-list a successor to Crosstalk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 989 It has recently become apparent to many subscribers of the Crosstalk Discussion List -- a list originating in response to a dialogue between John Dominic Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson, and Marcus Borg and dedicated to the critical discussion of questions concerning the historical Jesus and the origins of early Christianity -- that if Crosstalk was to continue to be the forum it was originally intended to be, that List's current incarnation as an unmoderated discussion group was no longer viable. Consequently, a new, moderated version of Crosstalk, Crosstalk2, has been initiated to stand as the old Crosstalk's successor. Those interested in joining this moderated version of Crosstalk may do so either by following the subscription links found at: http://www.egroups.com/list/crosstalk2/ or by sending an e-mail to crosstalk2-subscribe@egroups.com Yours, Jeffrey Gibson -- Jeffrey B. Gibson 7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A Chicago, Illinois 60626 e-mail jgibson000@ameritech.net From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 22 22:15:18 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id WAA17710; Sat, 22 May 1999 22:15:17 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 22:20:59 -0400 From: Jim West Subject: Re: Cold Comfort [was: tc-list Comfort's book...] X-Sender: jwest@highland.net To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Message-id: <1.5.4.32.19990523022059.00665eb4@highland.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2765 At 06:32 PM 5/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >Speaking as essentially an by-stander here, then let me ask the obvious >question, Jim. Why do you seem to be so hell-bent on pushing Comfort's book? Im not- but I do believe in fair play. Even in academia. > >The simply fact is that no one has simply "disparged" or "undermined" >Comfort's book. Rather several major scholars in the field have pointed to >what are apparently very serious problems with the book. Problems which, >quite frankly, you have yet to seriously address. Rubbish. I have offered numerous evidences regarding Comfort's accuracy. Why do you refuse it? > >Bart Ehrman pointed to several "egregious historical errors" in the What were these errors? Bart never made this claim explicit did he? Yet his broad statements have been accepted as fact by you and others, haven't they. In other words, many have rejected the book having never set eyes on it. Why? >introduction to the book; this you dismissed as Prof Ehrman "not liking" >the introduction. A great many transcriptional errors have been pointed >out. Rather than addressing this point you have, amazingly enough, simply >pointed to places where errors haven't been made! ("No, I assure your >Eminence, parts of it are excellent." ;-) So make the same accusation against Bart. Or is equality only granted to those of superior standing? > >In short, no one has doubted that were this book what it purposes to be, >then it would be an extremely valuable resource. The only question is, >_is_ this that book? Have you seen it? > >The simple fact of the matter is this: If a books such as this can serve >_any_ purpose, it is that it represents a source which can be turned to by >those who do not have access to the original manuscripts (or reliable >facsimiles). And it is trustworhty. But instead of looking at it yourself yo have evidently accepted the evaluation of Maurice and Bart without further ado. So be it. But I would submit that there is another side to the story. > >And given that, for a book such as this, anything less than darn near >perfect simply is not, like it or not, good enough. Good luck finding it. > >Jim, ol'-net-buddy, I'm sorry, but this is getting silly. I agree. It is ridiculous that people are willing to say something about a book they have not laid eyes on. > >Your contributions to the various list have always been of great help to me >and, I'm sure, others. This sort of nonsense is, quite frankly, unworthy >of you. I apologize. My ire is always raised when someone's work is dismissed out of hand by virtue of one reviewer's comments. > >Nichael Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 00:06:11 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id AAA17959; Sun, 23 May 1999 00:06:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199905230411.AAA10474@garnet.sover.net> Comments: SoVerNet Verification (on garnet.sover.net) newdell from st232.virt.sover.net [207.136.205.232] 207.136.205.232 Sun, 23 May 1999 00:11:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: nichael@sover.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 00:15:08 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: Nichael Lynn Cramer Subject: Re: Cold Comfort [was: tc-list Comfort's book...] Cc: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990523022059.00665eb4@highland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 535 Jim West wrote: > [...] Jim I have really said all I can say on the topic, but one final point... >[...] But instead of looking at it yourself yo have >evidently accepted the evaluation of Maurice and Bart without further ado. >So be it. But I would submit that there is another side to the story. The careful reader will note that I have never written so much as a single word expressing an opinion --either in condemnation or in support-- concerning the book being discussed. That was not the issue I was addressing. Nichael From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 12:16:25 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA20035; Sun, 23 May 1999 12:16:23 -0400 Message-ID: <37482B33.68A2@total.net> Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 12:22:11 -0400 From: Mike and Jeanne Arcieri X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02E-KIT (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... References: <3.0.6.32.19990522132855.007f5100@mail.teleport.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 931 > Dale M. Wheeler wrote: > > > It was my understanding that the book's release was delayed (twice?) > precisely because one or more of the pre-pub reviewers/editors had > discovered the same types of errors that Maurice found, and that is was > sent back to Comfort, et.al., to be fixed, ie., the papyri were supposed to > be re-examined/transcriptions corrected. So either someone decided to turn > it loose finally without a complete rechecking or this *is* the rechecked > version. In any case, someone has dropped the ball on this project, which > given the easily identifiable errors in the transcriptions, should have > exhibited virtual perfection. > > XAIREIN... > Can you imagine the TC-LIST discussion if one of those pre-pub editions was the one published? ;-) ;-) Good thing they published the 'corrected' edition... ;-) (Just a joke, Jim, no need for any flame-throwing :-) ) Thanks for the info Dale. Mike From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:24 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27625; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:21 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort vs. Ruben Swanson Message-ID: <19990523.214500.4495.4.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <04f201bea47f$51b26440$e9b91ed1@dcc-1> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,2-8,14-20 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 964 On Sat, 22 May 1999 14:14:34 -0400 "Perry L. Stepp" writes: >At some point, Vincent Broman (is Vincent still on the list?) checked >samples of Swanson against the NA27 and Tischendorf 8th. His general >impression was that Swanson's volumes were slightly less accurate than >the other two, but still quite reliable. >From my discussions with Swanson a couple of years back, his point was that there would be differences between what he reported and what appeared in NA27 or Tischendorf, since his reading of the films of the MSS at times differed from the printed text of both those editions. I am not sure whether he meant only in the area of orthography (which definitely is one known situation), or in what we would term real error. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:26 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27631; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:22 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort vs. Ruben Swanson Message-ID: <19990523.214500.4495.3.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <19990522184041.DEND14725@[12.73.97.73]> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-6,15-21 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 995 On Sat, 22 May 1999 11:36:45 -0700 "clayton stirling bartholomew" >My question is really about Ruben Swanson. Are his works on the >Gospels and Acts reliable or are they in the same ball park with >Comfort/Barrett? >From my experience in using Swanson, i find his level of accuracy is significantly high, and certainly much higher thanComfort/Barrett. He does call p45 "p46" title in the introduction to his Matthew volume, and he does try to make a case for 1346 as a "new" fam13 member when he apparently was collating the actual fam13 MS 346 (perhaps from a mislabeled microfilm box, or from mislabeling his original collation sheets). Other than those items, I have no list of known errors in Swanson to report (unlike C/B, albeit I'm sure there are some. But they are few indeed). ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:27 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27634; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:24 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort on P12 Message-ID: <19990523.214502.4495.8.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990522194139.0068010c@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-9,13-14,18-19,22-23,26-27,29-35 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1561 On Sat, 22 May 1999 15:41:39 -0400 Jim West writes: >P12- heb 1:1, consists of 3 lines of badly preserved text. I have, on >my desk, the very excellent transcription of Toshio Hirunuma ....... >On the second line, 15th letter, Hirunuma has "gamma" while C/B have >"tau". The photo, so far as I can tell using magnification, has "tau". >Gamma, apparently, makes no sense here, whereas tau certainly does. In this case I have neither a photo nor ready access to the Amherst Papyri volumes or Hirunuma's book. Does Hirunuma's reconstruction of the Greek text simply break off following the Gamma, without a suggested continuation? There could be a logic behind the Gamma if GONEUSIN had been unconsciously substituted by the scribe for PATRASIN, leaving out the article in the process (the omission of TOIS still would be problematic, however).. A misreading by Hirunuma of a Tau as a Gamma is equally likely, of course, especially if the letter is fragmentary or if the ink were faint or flaked. But if so, then misreading by C/B would be equally possible. Of course a final possibility might simply be a typo in Hirunuma's book in a place where C/B were correct. Any one of these three possibilities is plausible. I would not count this one either way without checking the _editio princeps_ or other authoritative sources. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:36 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27674; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:31 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... Message-ID: <19990523.214500.4495.5.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990522192042.00682814@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-4,6,8-14,17-18,21-22,24-25,30-31,37-38,53-54,56-65 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3079 On Sat, 22 May 1999 15:20:42 -0400 Jim West writes: >At 08:19 PM 5/22/99 +0200, you wrote: >I offered a number of passages, chosen at random, where C/B's >transcription was 100% accurate. Yet, for some reason, these texts have been >brushed aside. Evidently some are only interested in the minor number of >errors while willing to overlook the many passages where correct >transcription has occurred. >Have you taken account of those? No "brushing aside" intended, Jim. One of the passages you checked and declared 100% accurate was P75 in Lk. 13:28-30. You are _correct_ that P75 has no error in that segment of text. However, read 10 lines further down on the _same_ leaf, same side (fol.30r), to Lk. 13:33, and you will see that C/B read EXOMENH when the photo reads clearly the correct ERCOMENH. Continue on two pages further: at Lk 14:18 in P75 (fol.31r), the C/B transcription has HRXANTO when the photo clearly reads HRXATO. I will grant that all _other_ text on that three-page span (fol.30r, 31v, 31r) covering Lk 13:28-14:26a appears to be a correct transcription, and the same will hold for most of the text (my 98% previously stated) of _all_ MSS transcribed in C/B (e.g., in a spot check of P66 in C/B I found _no_ errors in C/B's transcription of fol.1v, fol.25r, fol.50r, fol.52r). But still what is the point if complete leaves or individual verse segments such as Lk. 13:28-30 come out 100% correct? The problem is still, as Waltz pointed out statistically, that every error in a book of this nature affects its reliability and usefulness much more seriously than a large quantity of correct text, which most books have as a matter of course, else they would not be published. The unwary user of C/B or even you apparently could confidently assert in a scholarly presentation. "P75 reads EXOMENH in Lk 13:33 and HRXANTO in Lk 14:8, which demonstrates this scribe's tendency to omit as well as to add individual letters subconsciously." You could do this because you consider the C/B text basically "good", "accurate", and "correct," as you have stated. But such a confident assertion regarding plain and clear errors created by C/B (of which you would be totally unaware had not someone else pointed them out) could wreck the thrust of a paper which was dependent upon the accurate reporting of such readings. That is precisely the point everyone is making regarding the errors. If the readers _cannot tell_ at any given point whether C/B are accurate, then _how_ can they draw conclusions from what is being presented at any given point without being forced to totally abandon C/B and go over precisely the same ground anew, which effectively makes the book useless for any scholarly purpose? That, Jim, is the problem with C/B, and _not_ the vast bulk of correct text which otherwise appears therein. Peace. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:35 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27670; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:31 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort on P12 Message-ID: <19990523.214502.4495.7.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990522202632.0068be2c@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-4,6-8,10-13,15-18,22-23,28-29,34-35,38-39,44-45,51-57 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2569 On Sat, 22 May 1999 16:26:32 -0400 Jim West writes: >At 04:01 PM 5/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >>Having not yet seen the book, let me ask a question (that I've asked about >>three times before, but never received an answer): >> >>Using this specific example, how does C/B signify this problematic reading >>(i.e. gamma vs tau) in his transcription? >questionable letters or words are in brackets- unclear letters or >words have a dot under them- in other words, the standard method of marking >questionable readings. Their system of notation is no different than >any other I have seen utilized. WAIT A MINUTE JIM -- Now I KNOW you must be just pulling everyone's chain with all the absurdities. Are you sure you even HAVE a copy of Comfort and Barrett? If so, please cite even ONE case where C/B place a dot under a disputed letter. The facts are these: 1) Comfort and Barrett do NOT place dots under "unclear letters or words"; (2) nor do they follow "the standard method" and "system of notation" found in most other scholarly transcriptions. Read what they themselves say on pp.14-15 of their introduction (emphasis mine!): "Specialists will notice that we have NOT used underdots to indicate fragmentary letters. Publishing constraints required their omission from the outset. Those desiring to see a transcription with these notations may consult the _editio princeps_ noted in the bibliography for each manuscript." Sounds to me like they do _not_ use underdots, Jim, and that their method is in fact "different" from any other system normally utilized, since those wanting to see "normal" transcriptions are directed elsewhere. Of course their suggestion that the "specialist" go to the _editio princeps_ seems in itself to vitiate the entire intent in publishing their book -- who else but "specialists" or those being trained to perform _accurate_ text-critical collation, transcription, and analysis would be the intended market for this volume? It seems like many points from my forthcoming review of C/B are becoming displayed piecemeal during this interesting discussion....I certainly hope someone out there from the publishers will pay attention to the problems noted and not pretend that they don't exist or are somehow not serious. The book has got problems -- and far too many of them -- for scholarly use. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:35 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27665; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:30 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... Message-ID: <19990523.214502.4495.9.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990522210544.00688854@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-6,8-9,16-26,29,32-34,36-41,44-45,48-54 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2445 On Sat, 22 May 1999 17:05:44 -0400 Jim West writes: >At 01:28 PM 5/22/99 -0700, you wrote: >Um- you mean like the virtual perfection evidenced in the harmony >displayed between the 5200 odd manuscripts of the Greek New Testament? >Wonder who can be blamed for "dropping the ball" on the preservation >and transmission of the Biblical text...... (so much for inspiration and "overseeing of >the transmission" of that inspired Urtext) Precisely what would any of that have to do with inaccuracy in Comfort and Barrett's book, Jim? This is a red herring, plain and simple. While you're at it, please take note that (so far as I know) not one person on this list has claimed any "perfect preservation and transmission of the Biblical text" in a manner which would exclude normal transmissional error or deliberate alterations in the MSS preserved to us. So what's the point? There is none. >How was the "ball dropped"? What on earth do y'all have against >Comfort's work? Errors. Too many errors. Nothing more. >Is it because his views on the importance of early mss >leaves you a tad disgruntled? But that does not invalidate everything >the guy does. Has even ONE person complained about the Comfort/Barrett book in view of Comfort's text-critical theories, Jim? You are creating ghosts where there are none. I would not care whether Comfort were a pro-Byzantine spokesman par excellence -- if his book containing "exact transcriptions" isn't "exact", something is seriously wrong. That's it, plain and simple. >In all honesty, from Maurice, to Bart, to Bob, there seems to be an almost >intentional effort to undermine and disparage Comfort's work. >I am really starting to think that there is simply here some >measure of academic blackballing going on. Macarthyism in Biblical >Textual Criticism. I had a wonderful story about the illuminati, the secret meetings, and the black helicopters which would have explained all of this, but the High Council instructed me not to reveal the secrets just yet. :-) Sorry, Jim, no one is getting blackballed for their textual theory, nor, as far as I can see, is anyone on this list getting blackballed, despite their views. I'm still here. :-) ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 21:45:35 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id VAA27672; Sun, 23 May 1999 21:45:31 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list P5 from C/B Message-ID: <19990523.214501.4495.6.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990522200413.006767a8@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-2,5-6,8-9,11,13-14,23-31,33-35,39-40,43-49,53-54, 58-59,61,68-80 From: M A Robinson Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 21:50:36 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3547 On Sat, 22 May 1999 16:04:13 -0400 Jim West 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: >(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. 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 >transcriptions are exact. 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?). >Again, C/B's transcription of this sample demonstrates 100% accuracy. >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 From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 22:54:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id WAA27945; Sun, 23 May 1999 22:54:56 -0400 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 4.5 (0410) Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 19:57:41 -0700 Subject: tc-list Comfort audience definition From: "clayton stirling bartholomew" To: TC list Mime-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19990524030040.DPQI12008@[12.73.98.141]> Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 2095 M A Robinson wrote: > "Specialists will notice that we have NOT used underdots to indicate > fragmentary letters. Publishing constraints required their omission from > the outset. Those desiring to see a transcription with these notations > may consult the _editio princeps_ noted in the bibliography for each > manuscript." > {snip} > Of course their suggestion that the "specialist" go to the _editio > princeps_ seems in itself to vitiate the entire intent in publishing > their book -- who else but "specialists" or those being trained to > perform _accurate_ text-critical collation, transcription, and analysis > would be the intended market for this volume? Maurice has uncovered an issue that has been nagging me as I have been evaluating this book. It seems like the Comfort/Barrett and Baker have a problem with the definition of their intended audience for this book. Do they really think that the bulk of pastors and bible students are going to take an interest is this kind of work? Not a chance! When I saw the word "specialist" on page 14 of C/B, I said, oh no! here we go again. This is the same sort of talk you hear from the publishers of dictionaries who transliterate whole clauses of Greek and Hebrew for the "non-specialist." The class of people who cannot read the Greek alphabet but who can read greek fine when it is transliterated is an empty set. I think that the intended audience for C/B may also turn out to be an empty set. Their audience definition seems to be: People who like to dabble in textual criticism but don't need to know about partial letters and don't care if the information is reliable. If you really need these two missing items you "may consult the _editio princeps_.." What a statement!! If I could have consulted _editio princeps_ would I have purchased this book? Perhaps. I intend to keep this book. When Baker shreds the remainders of the first run it may become a collectors item. Meanwhile I will learn a lot and have a lot of fun looking for errors. -- Clayton Stirling Bartholomew Three Tree Point P.O. Box 255 Seahurst WA 98062 From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sun May 23 23:06:10 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id XAA28006; Sun, 23 May 1999 23:06:08 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990523231135.0080a100@pop.mindspring.com> X-Sender: scarlson@pop.mindspring.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 23:11:35 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: "Stephen C. Carlson" Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort on P12 In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19990522202632.0068be2c@highland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1012 At 04:26 PM 5/22/99 -0400, Jim West wrote: >At 04:01 PM 5/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >>Having not yet seen the book, let me ask a question (that I've asked about >>three times before, but never recieved an answer): >> >>Using this specific example, how does C/B signify this problematic reading >>(i.e. gamma vs tau) in his transcription? > >questionable letters or words are in brackets- unclear letters or words have >a dot under them- in other words, the standard method of marking >questionable readings. Their system of notation is no different than any >other I have seen utilized. To answer your question, Nichael, there is nothing C/B's transcription that this reading of tau vs. gamma is problematic. Others have posted that this is consistent with C/B's policy. Stephen Carlson -- Stephen C. Carlson mailto:scarlson@mindspring.com Synoptic Problem Home Page http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/ "Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words." Shujing 2.35 From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 02:18:48 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id CAA28907; Mon, 24 May 1999 02:18:46 -0400 Message-ID: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B3C@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> From: "Bauer, Marc" To: "'tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu'" Subject: RE: Cold Comfort [was: tc-list Comfort's book...] Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 00:24:28 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3038 ThD West: Last comment? Three posts or more ago, no? Marc Bauer -----Original Message----- From: Jim West [mailto:jwest@Highland.Net] Sent: Saturday, May 22, 1999 8:21 PM To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: Cold Comfort [was: tc-list Comfort's book...] At 06:32 PM 5/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >Speaking as essentially an by-stander here, then let me ask the obvious >question, Jim. Why do you seem to be so hell-bent on pushing Comfort's book? Im not- but I do believe in fair play. Even in academia. > >The simply fact is that no one has simply "disparged" or "undermined" >Comfort's book. Rather several major scholars in the field have pointed to >what are apparently very serious problems with the book. Problems which, >quite frankly, you have yet to seriously address. Rubbish. I have offered numerous evidences regarding Comfort's accuracy. Why do you refuse it? > >Bart Ehrman pointed to several "egregious historical errors" in the What were these errors? Bart never made this claim explicit did he? Yet his broad statements have been accepted as fact by you and others, haven't they. In other words, many have rejected the book having never set eyes on it. Why? >introduction to the book; this you dismissed as Prof Ehrman "not liking" >the introduction. A great many transcriptional errors have been pointed >out. Rather than addressing this point you have, amazingly enough, simply >pointed to places where errors haven't been made! ("No, I assure your >Eminence, parts of it are excellent." ;-) So make the same accusation against Bart. Or is equality only granted to those of superior standing? > >In short, no one has doubted that were this book what it purposes to be, >then it would be an extremely valuable resource. The only question is, >_is_ this that book? Have you seen it? > >The simple fact of the matter is this: If a books such as this can serve >_any_ purpose, it is that it represents a source which can be turned to by >those who do not have access to the original manuscripts (or reliable >facsimiles). And it is trustworhty. But instead of looking at it yourself yo have evidently accepted the evaluation of Maurice and Bart without further ado. So be it. But I would submit that there is another side to the story. > >And given that, for a book such as this, anything less than darn near >perfect simply is not, like it or not, good enough. Good luck finding it. > >Jim, ol'-net-buddy, I'm sorry, but this is getting silly. I agree. It is ridiculous that people are willing to say something about a book they have not laid eyes on. > >Your contributions to the various list have always been of great help to me >and, I'm sure, others. This sort of nonsense is, quite frankly, unworthy >of you. I apologize. My ire is always raised when someone's work is dismissed out of hand by virtue of one reviewer's comments. > >Nichael Best, Jim +++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim West, ThD email- jwest@highland.net web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 03:15:30 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id DAA29308; Mon, 24 May 1999 03:15:28 -0400 Message-ID: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B3E@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> From: "Bauer, Marc" To: "'tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu'" Subject: RE: tc-list Comfort's book... Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 01:21:09 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 398 I had a wonderful story about the illuminati, the secret meetings, and the black helicopters which would have explained all of this, but the High Council instructed me not to reveal the secrets just yet. :-) You speak out of class ;) Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA Yawn, Marc Bauer From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 09:11:17 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA01355; Mon, 24 May 1999 09:11:16 -0400 Message-Id: <199905241317.JAA18154@pike.sover.net> Comments: SoVerNet Verification (on pike.sover.net) newdell from st232.virt.sover.net [207.136.205.232] 207.136.205.232 Mon, 24 May 1999 09:17:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: nichael@sover.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2 Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 09:18:28 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu From: Nichael Lynn Cramer Subject: No dots? [was: tc-list Comfort on P12] Cc: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19990523231135.0080a100@pop.mindspring.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990522202632.0068be2c@highland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1458 Stephen C. Carlson wrote: >>At 04:01 PM 5/22/99 -0400, you wrote: >>>Using this specific example, how does C/B signify this problematic reading >>>(i.e. gamma vs tau) in his transcription? >To answer your question, Nichael, there is nothing C/B's transcription >that this reading of tau vs. gamma is problematic. Others have posted >that this is consistent with C/B's policy. Stephen Thank you for your response. Freely admitting that I've not yet seen the book, this would seem to point to a rather serious problem with the book. As I've suggested earlier, it seems hard to understand what function the book could have other than as a resource which could be consulted by those who do not have access to the originals (or reliable facsimilies). However, even if the transcriptions in the book were otherwise flawless, the usefulness of such a book would seem to be seriously compromised by the absence of any indication of problematic readings. One could argue that to implicitly suggest that a given reading is certain where it is not is to introduce a whole new class of error, at least as troublesome as a merely faulty transcription. If, as others have written, the introduction to the book suggest the specialist can turn to the _editio princeps_ to resolve these issues one can only ask what could be the point in publishing the book in the first place? Why not rather, for example, a high quality set of facsimilies or photocopies? Nichael From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 10:26:41 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA01811; Mon, 24 May 1999 10:26:40 -0400 Message-ID: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B41@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> From: "Bauer, Marc" To: "'tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu'" Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 08:32:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 314 Greetings, TC-Listers: Would one of you goodhearts forward Bob Scanlon's addy (?) at UBS to me off-list, please? One of my co-workers wants to get the BHS. Has 4 or 5 come out on that yet? Did I say I was out of the loop :) Regards, Marc Bauer Computer Operator I Computer Operations Bureau State of Montana From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 16:45:40 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA05745; Mon, 24 May 1999 16:45:40 -0400 From: "Wieland Willker" To: "TC-List" Subject: tc-list Dating of p46 Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 22:51:22 +0200 Message-Id: <000001bea627$2e8bc5c0$34066686@wieland> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 462 Someone asked me about P46 and the article: Young Kyu Kim, "Palaeographical Dating of p46 to the Later First Century," Biblica, Vol. 69, No. 2, 1988 What can be said about the dating? Best wishes Wieland ------------------------ Wieland Willker mailto:willker@chemie.uni-bremen.de http://purl.org/WILLKER/index.html Egerton Homepage: http://purl.org/WILLKER/Egerton/Egerton_home.html Secret Mark Homepage: http://purl.org/WILLKER/Secret/secmark_home.html From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 17:50:03 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA06065; Mon, 24 May 1999 17:50:02 -0400 From: rlmullen@netpath.net Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19990524175813.007a9650@netpath.net> X-Sender: rlmullen@netpath.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 17:58:13 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Dating of p46 In-Reply-To: <000001bea627$2e8bc5c0$34066686@wieland> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 806 Within the last two or three years, a careful paleographical presentation was made at the SBL annual meeting which reaffirmed Kenyon's dating of P46 to ca.200. I don't have the old program books handy, but perhaps someone else on the list can supply the exact reference. --Rod Mullen t 10:51 PM 5/24/99 +0200, you wrote: >Someone asked me about P46 and the article: >Young Kyu Kim, "Palaeographical Dating of p46 to the Later First >Century," >Biblica, Vol. 69, No. 2, 1988 > >What can be said about the dating? > >Best wishes > Wieland >------------------------ >Wieland Willker >mailto:willker@chemie.uni-bremen.de >http://purl.org/WILLKER/index.html >Egerton Homepage: http://purl.org/WILLKER/Egerton/Egerton_home.html >Secret Mark Homepage: http://purl.org/WILLKER/Secret/secmark_home.html > > From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 18:56:35 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA06370; Mon, 24 May 1999 18:56:34 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 15:59:30 -0700 Subject: Re: tc-list Dating of p46 Message-ID: <19990524.155931.6462.0.jeffcate@juno.com> References: <3.0.5.32.19990524175813.007a9650@netpath.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,6-41 From: Jeff Cate Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1619 Wieland, Rod Mullen was referring to the presentation by Bruce W. Griffin (Oxford Univ) "The Palaeographical Dating of P-46" at the '96 SBL annual meeting in New Orleans. I don't have any transcript or hardcopy of the presentation, but I remember it as a very well-argued presentation despite the undesirable timeslot of 5:45 in the afternoon :-) Jeff Cate, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Christian Studies California Baptist University Riverside, California 92504 On Mon, 24 May 1999 17:58:13 -0400 rlmullen@netpath.net writes: >Within the last two or three years, a careful paleographical >presentation >was made at the SBL annual meeting which reaffirmed Kenyon's dating of >P46 >to ca.200. I don't have the old program books handy, but perhaps >someone >else on the list can supply the exact reference. --Rod Mullen > >t 10:51 PM 5/24/99 +0200, you wrote: >>Someone asked me about P46 and the article: >>Young Kyu Kim, "Palaeographical Dating of p46 to the Later First >>Century," >>Biblica, Vol. 69, No. 2, 1988 >> >>What can be said about the dating? >> >>Best wishes >> Wieland >>------------------------ >>Wieland Willker >>mailto:willker@chemie.uni-bremen.de >>http://purl.org/WILLKER/index.html >>Egerton Homepage: http://purl.org/WILLKER/Egerton/Egerton_home.html >>Secret Mark Homepage: >http://purl.org/WILLKER/Secret/secmark_home.html >> >> > ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 19:08:38 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA06409; Mon, 24 May 1999 19:08:37 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:14:08 -0700 (PDT) To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu In-reply-to: <04f201bea47f$51b26440$e9b91ed1@dcc-1> (plstepp@flash.net) Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort vs. Ruben Swanson From: Vincent Broman Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 802 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > At some point, Vincent Broman (is Vincent still on the list?) checked > samples of Swanson... Lurking lately, but here. The review article can be found in TC vol 1 at http://shemesh.scholar.emory.edu/scripts/TC/vol01/Swanson1996rev.html . Vincent Broman San Diego, California, USA Email: broman at sd.znet.com (home) or spawar.navy.mil or nosc.mil (work) Phone: +1 619 284 3775 Starship: 32d42m22s N 117d14m13s W === PGPv2 protected mail preferred. For public key finger me at np.nosc.mil === -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE3SdsCTojmOK6N09URAkuCAJ9Yz7vokALwukYxsp6CagL2BYKfkwCfUDyh 3f3npSn/Jtts3frcdU9oQbE= =klBB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 19:29:34 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA06467; Mon, 24 May 1999 19:29:34 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: Cold Comfort [was: tc-list Comfort's book...] Message-ID: <19990524.193141.17599.0.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <1.5.4.32.19990523022059.00665eb4@highland.net> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-6,9-10,12-17,28-29,33,36-42,48-52,58-64 From: M A Robinson Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 19:34:34 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3049 On Sat, 22 May 1999 22:20:59 -0400 Jim West writes: >>Bart Ehrman pointed to several "egregious historical errors" in the > >What were these errors? Bart never made this claim explicit did he? Agreed. It _would_ be informative were Bart to provide a few representative examples. Tracking down factual errors in the introduction and related matters was not my area of concern. >>In short, no one has doubted that were this book what it purposes to be, >>then it would be an extremely valuable resource. The only question is, >>_is_ this that book? > >Have you seen it? Why the _ad hominem_ approach here? How about those of us who _have_ seen it, have tested it, and found it wanting. You purportedly have the C/B book in hand: have you checked and verified that my reported errors are in fact such? Please do, since if you and I both agree as to the errors, then everyone else can certainly accept what two opposing parties concur in as factual, and it then will become irrelevant as to whether they then have seen the book. Certainly, most text-critical students "know" that von Soden and Legg's apparatuses have errors, regardless of whether they have ever seen the books or even know what the errors happen to be; they should not have to track them down personally before they become valid, should they?. Further, you already have my statements regarding some portions of C/B which have _no_ error; if you similarly agree on this point, which I'm sure you will, then anyone else can accept those portions as accurate without possessing the volume, correct? Your point erroneously parallels the example of someone declaring England not to exist, simply because he has never seen the place, but has relied only on someone else's testimony. >>And given that, for a book such as this, anything less than darn near >>perfect simply is not, like it or not, good enough. > >Good luck finding it. Seems that I have already pointed out that one could obtain the IGNPT John Papyri volume or the Muenster "Das Neue Testament auf Papyrus" for the Epistles and then _would_ have the "darn near perfect" transcriptions without having to look very far. It's really not that difficult; plus, the difference in accuracy and precision between those volumes and C/B is clearly significant. >I apologize. My ire is always raised when someone's work is dismissed >out of hand by virtue of one reviewer's comments. It seems appropriate that I entitled my original critique message of C/B as "Don't shoot the messenger -- this book has problems." You do seem bent, Jim, on going after the messenger instead of the substance of the message. If 20 other people obtain the book, find additional errors, and come to the same conclusion as I about this being a serious problem, would that change your opinion? Likely not. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Mon May 24 19:32:26 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA06508; Mon, 24 May 1999 19:32:26 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 16:37:57 -0700 (PDT) To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu In-reply-to: (waltzmn@skypoint.com) Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's new book From: Vincent Broman Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 966 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > This brings up the strong suggestion that somebody make up a web site > containing these lists of corrections. The entmp.org site would be a natural, except that it hasn't been maintained for the last few years. I could put stuff up on my WWW site, if someone else does the maintainance effort. I'm afraid shepherding responsibilities have crowded a number of things off my to-do list in the last year. Vincent Broman San Diego, California, USA Email: broman at sd.znet.com (home) or spawar.navy.mil or nosc.mil (work) Phone: +1 619 284 3775 Starship: 32d42m22s N 117d14m13s W === PGPv2 protected mail preferred. For public key finger me at np.nosc.mil === -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v0.9.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE3SeK4TojmOK6N09URAgKmAJ44JxCHDUOtxkeIC9c8IrMC6hZkxQCfWfwM WVvdg8N+lpchOhUhGbrc02c= =+z1M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 25 16:54:41 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA13579; Tue, 25 May 1999 16:54:41 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 15:54:35 -0500 Subject: tc-list Comfort and Barrett Book in Galatians Message-ID: <19990525.155646.-228453.1.jagehman@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 8-16,22-28 X-Juno-Att: 0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: James A Gehman Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1598 I have read with concern the discussion over the C/B book. Like many of you, I quickly ordered the book. I am a professor of theology in Caracas, Venezuela, and such a book would be priceless, if it were accurate. Working in Venezuela, I have no access to the facsimiles and transcriptions which can be found in the larger seminary libraries in the States. I am presently working on Galatians and so did a quick collation of the transcriptions in C/B with reference to Galatians. I found the following differences (using C/P transliteration scheme) between C/B and P46 (according to Kenyon, Chester Beatty Papyri, Fasc III): Verse P46 C/B 1.6 OUTW OUTWS 1.11 DE UMEIN GAR UMEIN 1.20 UMIN IDOU UMEIN IDOU 4.15 GA[R UMIN GA[R UMEIN (contra NA27) 4.29 WS (final) WS (medial) It is particularly disconcerting to think that in P46, the main papyrus witness to Galatians, has five discrepencies with the transcription according to Kenyon. Since I am not a professional textual critic and cannot adequately verify by the photographs which transcription is correct, can anyone on this list please verify which of the readings are correct? Sincerely, James A. Gehman, M.A. Missionary in Residence, Brookside Community Church jagehman@hotmail.com *** jagehman@juno.com Web site: http://www.familyshoebox.com/family/gehmangateway ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Tue May 25 18:21:21 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA13904; Tue, 25 May 1999 18:21:21 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort's book... Message-ID: <19990525.182512.4495.24.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B3E@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,2-5,8-9,12-20 From: M A Robinson Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 18:24:57 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 747 On Mon, 24 May 1999 01:21:09 -0600 "Bauer, Marc" writes: >You speak out of class ;) Precisely. Once McCarthy was invoked, the issue degenerated to the relative merits of "Point of Order" versus "Conspiracy Theory"; the latter film was far more entertaining. :-) At least the discussion over the C/B book seems to have subsided, and just in time; I now go off-list for the summer months to do some more collation work in Muenster and not worry about the errors in C/B. :-). Best wishes to all of you for the summer! ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 26 05:27:22 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id FAA16977; Wed, 26 May 1999 05:27:22 -0400 From: "Wieland Willker" To: "TC-List" Subject: tc-list Re: Comfort and Barrett Book in Galatians Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 11:30:52 +0200 Message-Id: <000001bea75a$7263f040$67566686@chemie.unibremen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1247 J. Gehman wrote: > I found the following differences (using C/P transliteration scheme) between > C/B and P46 (according to Kenyon, Chester Beatty Papyri, Fasc III): >Verse P46 C/B >1.6 OUTW OUTWS >1.11 DE UMEIN GAR UMEIN >1.20 UMIN IDOU UMEIN IDOU >4.15 GA[R UMIN GA[R UMEIN (contra NA27) >4.29 WS (final) WS (medial) I have checked this on the plates: Letters in round ( ) brackets indicate "dot"-letters (uncertain). 1:6 I read: "OUTW(S) (T)..." There is a letter and "S" is possible. 1:11 "GNWRIZW DE UMEIN ADELFOI" not "GAR" 1:20 "UMIN" is completely in the lacuna. The first word readable is ENWPION. Before that are two obscure letters: "OU" acc. to Kenyon. So we have: "UMIN/UMEIN ID](OU) ENWPION... 4:15 This UMIN/UMEIN is also completely in the lacuna. 4:29 TEKNA ESTE AL' WS - line end. (The appostrophe is visible.) (the beginning of the next line is a lacuna) Conclusion: - One possible improvement (1:6 OUTWS) - One clear error: 1:11 - two times UMEIN: This is a guess, both times it's in the lacuna. - WS: What do you mean with medial WS? [Everything without guarantee] Best wishes Wieland -------------------- mailto:willker@chemie.uni-bremen.de http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 26 05:32:22 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id FAA17015; Wed, 26 May 1999 05:32:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199905260938.KAA13877@haymarket.ed.ac.uk> From: "Professor L.W. Hurtado" To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 10:30:20 +000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: tc-list Dating of p46 Priority: normal In-reply-to: <3.0.5.32.19990524175813.007a9650@netpath.net> References: <000001bea627$2e8bc5c0$34066686@wieland> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 695 Yes, Griffin's paper on the palaeography of P46 was very persuasive, showing strong reasons for the common dating (early 3rd Cent.). An additional factor I pointed out in the SBL discussion of Griffin's paper is the form of the nomina sacra spelling of Iesous (IHS), which is probably best understood as a conflation form of the earlier practice of suspended spelling (IH) and the contraction spelling (IS). This conflation form is to my knowledge otherwise attested in mss no earlier than very early 3rd cent. Larry Hurtado L. W. Hurtado University of Edinburgh, New College Mound Place Edinburgh, Scotland EH1 2LX Phone: 0131-650-8920 Fax: 0131-650-6579 E-mail: L.Hurtado@ed.ac.uk From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Wed May 26 15:10:25 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id PAA20785; Wed, 26 May 1999 15:10:24 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort and Barrett Book in Galatians Message-ID: <19990526.104502.4495.1.seventh.guardian@juno.com> References: <19990525.155646.-228453.1.jagehman@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 1.49 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,2-13,16-17,21-22,27-33,44-47,49-50,53-54,62-67,69-76 From: M A Robinson Date: Wed, 26 May 1999 15:15:07 EDT Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 3452 On Tue, 25 May 1999 15:54:35 -0500 James A Gehman writes: > I am presently working on Galatians and so did a quick >collation of the transcriptions in C/B with reference to Galatians. I >found the following differences (using C/P transliteration scheme) >between C/B and P46 (according to Kenyon, Chester Beatty Papyri, Fasc >III): > >Verse P46 C/B >1.6 OUTW OUTWS >1.11 DE UMEIN GAR UMEIN These two definitely reflect differences between C/B and the transcription by Kenyon. Which of these is correct at any point of course can only be determined by looking at the photos. Gal. 1.6 reads OUTWTAX[ in the photo (and a dot should probably be put under the X; the TA is faint but clear enough to guarantee that there is no final Sigma on OUTW. So C/B are wrong on that one, even if movable -S is not a significant reading. Gal. 1.11 -- Things are different here, since DE or GAR obviously becomes significant, and both editors cannot be correct. My inclination (typed before even looking at the photo!) is to trust Kenyon, based on Comfort's track record. So after looking at the photo, I find that indeed Kenyon is correct and C/B are wrong (again). P46 clearly reads GNWRIZW DE UMEIN. Now for the other two cases: >1.20 UMIN IDOU UMEIN IDOU >4.15 GA[R UMIN GA[R UMEIN (contra NA27) In these two cases (as mentioned to Jim before), the problem lies in the editors' reconstruction of a portion of non-extant text. P46 is cited by both editors in 1.20 as containing ONLY the text ]OU ENWPION, with even the OU having dots below the letters in Kenyon (which C/B do not place under letters), so whether what preceded was UMIN ID] or UMEIN ID] is an editors call. Likewise, in 4.15, both editors similarly agree that the extant text is only GA[ , so the spelling of UMIN/UMEIN is again an editors' choice. Yet in both these cases, I would accept the reconstruction of C/B rather than Kenyon, simply because P46 in its extant portions elsewhere _does_ tend to spell the word as YMEIN quite consistently. >4.29 WS (final) WS (medial) This is merely a matter of transcription, since the uncial script of P46 has only the one form (C) of Sigma. No difference at this point at all. So three of the above cases do not relate to accuracy of transcription, and should not be counted for or against the accuracy issue, though in the YMIN/YMEIN cases C/B more accurately reflect the usage of P46. However, the two actual errors of transcription by C/B are far more serious, and once more serve to nullify the usefulness of the C/B edition (BTW, the DE / GAR interchange in 1:11 reflects a known variant, where DE has the support (teste Kenyon) of Aleph A TR, and GAR has the support of BDFG. So in this case especially, one can see how the error of C/B could skew the analysis of textual alignments if C/B were used authoritatively to support the wrong reading -- and that of course is precisely what we have been saying was the problem all along. >It is particularly disconcerting to think that in P46, the main >papyrus witness to Galatians, has five discrepancies with the >transcription according to Kenyon. Make that only two discrepancies. But of course even that is two too many. ============================================================== Maurice A. Robinson, Ph. D. Professor of Greek and New Testament Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, North Carolina, USA From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Thu May 27 07:17:59 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id HAA25533; Thu, 27 May 1999 07:17:58 -0400 Message-ID: <018E51C0313CD2119D5300062B001AE1BE5B57@doaisd02001.state.mt.us> From: "Bauer, Marc" To: "'hebraisticum@mail.Uni-Mainz.de'" , "Discussion of Hebrew Grammar and Etymology." , tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Subject: tc-list Barth's rule or law of vocalic sequence Date: Thu, 27 May 1999 05:23:46 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2407.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 414 Greetings from the desert of Montana: I keep coming across this "Barth's rule or law of vocalic sequence" and can not find a thing in the library or on the 'net about this. Would one of you help me on this? The context is Eblaite studies with Gordon and Pettinato. I'm looking for a reference to explain this so your reference or exposition offline would be great. In Service, Marc Bauer mbauer@state.mt.us From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 28 06:22:22 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id GAA03248; Fri, 28 May 1999 06:22:22 -0400 From: "Wieland Willker" To: "TC-List" Subject: tc-list Text und Textwert: Mt and Lk Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 12:25:10 +0200 Message-Id: <000101bea8f4$5da2f5c0$67566686@chemie.unibremen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 Importance: Normal X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1164 New volumes: Text und Textwert der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments Hrsg. v. Kurt Aland in Zusammenarbeit mit Annette Benduhn-Merz / Gerd Mink IV: Die Synoptischen Evangelien Bd 2: Das Matthäusevangelium Bd 2.1: Handschriftenliste und vergleichende Beschreibung Bd 2.2: Resultate der Kollation und Hauptliste sowie Ergänzungen Hrsg. v. Kurt Aland / Barbara Aland / Klaus Wachtel in Zusammenarbeit mit Klaus Witte Bd. 2.1: II, 23*, 516 S.; Bd. 2.2: IV, 327 S. + 61 S.1999. L Ln. DM 398,- / öS 2905,- / sFr 354,- / approx. US$ 249.00 ISBN 3-11-016418-3 (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung, 28/29) Bd. 3: Das Lukasevangelium Bd 3.1: Handschriftenliste und vergleichende Beschreibung Bd 3.2: Resultate der Kollation und Hauptliste sowie Ergänzungen Hrsg. v. Kurt Aland / Barbara Aland / Klaus Wachtel. In Zusammenarb. mit Klaus Witte Bd 3.1: VII, 545 S; Bd 3.2: IV, 535 S. + 62 S. 1999. Ln. DM 418,- / öS 3051,- / sFr 372,- / approx. US$ 261.00 ISBN 3-11-016420-5 (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung, 30/31) Best wishes Wieland -------------------- mailto:willker@chemie.uni-bremen.de http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/ From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Fri May 28 09:55:27 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id JAA03932; Fri, 28 May 1999 09:55:26 -0400 To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 08:57:12 -0500 Subject: Re: tc-list Comfort and Barrett Book in Galatians Message-ID: <19990528.085811.-258671.0.jagehman@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 2.0.11 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-7,9,11-14,21-27 X-Juno-Att: 0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: James A Gehman Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1284 Thanks to Wieland Willker and Maurice Robinson for their responses. Willker replied: >>- - WS: What do you mean with medial WS? And Robinson replied: >>>4.29 WS (final) WS (medial) >>This is merely a matter of transcription, since the uncial script of P46 >>has only the one form (C) of Sigma. No difference at this point at all. To this I respond: I am not trained in papyrology *and* from Venezuela I do not have access to transcriptions. So in the case of WS (medial: from the transliteration scheme of the Corpus-Paulinum list), this transcription *assumes* that WS(medial) is part of a word which is continued on the next line. The Kenyon transcription equally *assumes* that WS (final) is a particle. But at this point, Robinson has noted that the Uncial script does not differentiate. How is one to know the difference? Sincerely, James A. Gehman, M.A. Missionary in Residence, Brookside Community Church jagehman@hotmail.com *** jagehman@juno.com Web site: http://www.familyshoebox.com/family/gehmangateway ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] From owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Sat May 29 16:52:57 1999 Return-Path: Received: by shemesh.scholar.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id QAA21779; Sat, 29 May 1999 16:52:56 -0400 Message-Id: <199905292057.WAA28534@carno.brus.online.be> Subject: tc-list Mt 17.2 Tatian and Legg Date: Sam, 29 Mai 99 23:02:27 +0200 x-sender: vale5655@pop3.brus.online.be x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1 From: Jean Valentin To: "Liste TC-List" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: tc-list@shemesh.scholar.emory.edu content-length: 1329 Dear TC-ers, I have a question about the end of Mt 17.2 "ta de imatia autou = egeneto leuka ws to fws". According to most Greek witnesses, Jesus' = clothes became white "as light". Some witnesses, including D, the old = latin and sy.c, have "as snow" (possible harmo with Mt 28.3). Now there seems to be a third variant: "as the lightning" (sicut = splendor fulguris). I met it in one of my Arabic manuscripts, which I = suspect to be closely apparented to some form of the vetus syra. But = I didn't find parallels. My question is: where does Legg meet this = variant, as in his patristical apparatus he mentions that Tatian has = it? After going through most of the diatessaronic editions and = repertories of citations I have here, I found only the two variants = mentioned above, but not the third one. Where did Legg get this = information, or is there some diatessaric witness that escapes me? Thank you for your help. Jean V. _______________________________________________________________ Jean Valentin - 34 rue du Berceau - 1000 Bruxelles - Belgique tel. 32-2-280.01.37 e-mail : jgvalentin@arcadis.be _______________________________________________________________ "Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop compliqu=E9 est = inutilisable" _______________________________________________________________