Genesis 1 & 2 (Peter)
peter_kirk at sil.org
peter_kirk at sil.org
Mon Dec 6 16:41:12 EST 1999
Hebrews was probably cited by Clement of Rome c.95 CE. It is included
in the following papyri: P12 (III), P13 (III/IV), P17 (IV), P46 (ca.
200) etc. (Data from Nestle-Aland 27th edition). Tertullian, Clement
of Alexandria and Origen discussed its authorship. I think there is
little doubt that it dates back to the second century if not the
See also another comment below.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Genesis 1 & 2 (Peter)
Author: <mc2499 at mclink.it> at Internet
Date: 05/12/1999 17:49
>PK: So when was LXX Genesis (i.e. the text printed by
>Rahlfs etc) produced? Before, contemporary with or after the Wisdom of
>Solomon in the same volume? We don't know, I think. But it is unlikely
>to have been long after. So LXX Genesis is the pre-patristic support
>for creation ex nihilo which you asked me for, as is Hebrews.
You haven't established the "pre-patristic" qualification for Hebrews. What
shows you that Hebrews was known before patristic times?...
>Which was done first, the pointing or the "LXX" translation of Genesis?
>PK: Do you really not know? The Rahlfs LXX text is based mainly on
>three 4th-5th century CE manuscripts, two in the British Museum and
>one in the Vatican. The pointing of the Hebrew Bible is generally
>considered to be much later than this - or do you want to dispute
PK: Correction, I can't even report correctly what I have seen myself!
Sinaiticus at least is now at the new British Library building in
Euston Road (next to St. Pancras station), in a beautiful new display
By whom? Why? Is this another of your famous consensus statements of
opinion? There's a bunch of monkeys that think they are Shakespeare: well,
they've just written Hamlet!
PK: If you wish to put forward a theory that the MT was pointed before
the 4th century, please go ahead and show us your evidence. If not,
you are also agreeing with the consensus, so shut up!
But the "tried to keep him warm" isn't qatal, is it? (Sorry, for some
reason I can't find a copy of 1Kgs amongst the tanach files I have, so I'm
looking at the Strong's numbers in a bible program which indicates that the
verb form is not qatal. I gather the "tried to keep him warm" is a yiqtol,
so we're in better known waters and you don't seem to have an analogous
PK: Actually it's a WAYYIQTOL. I didn't say that QATAL can continue a
narrative sequence, only that it can start one.
More information about the b-hebrew