[b-hebrew] tiqqune sopherim
peterkirk at qaya.org
Wed May 4 19:31:55 EDT 2005
On 04/05/2005 20:31, Schmuel wrote:
>>After writing most of the above, I read Schmuel's contribution which seems to confirm that the tradition of a correction here is unreliable. Schmuel suggests that the corrections may have dated back to the time of Ezra and Nehemiah. Well, I accept that the entire Hebrew Bible may have been subject to extensive redaction in that time (except perhaps for those parts which were only written at about that time) (snip)
> Another reader privately asked me what were my views. I just want to be clear that I was not suggesting earlier corrections. My faith view is very simple, the Masoretic Text is a Received Text, and represents the scriptures, the Dvar Elohim.. ...
Just to clarify, I am close to agreeing with you. To me, the canonical
form of the Hebrew scriptures, the Dvar Elohim, is in principle what
emerged at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, at the time when authoritative
prophecy ceased (at least until the New Testament period, but that's
another matter). But in practice I understand that form as being very
close to the Masoretic text, because it was carefully preserved right
through the intervening period (as shown by the DSS Isaiah scroll). At
least, the MT is the closest that we can get to that text, although I
accept that in a few places we can get closer, mostly where there is
agreement between LXX and other ancient versions against MT.
>... The Tiqqune Sopherim represents an important challenge to that view, making it a very significant question to anyone concerned with questions of inspiration and preservation of the scripture text.
To me, if one of the Tiqqune Sopherim is a genuine change (and can be
shown to be so), the authoritative canonical form of the text would I
think be the original before this change. But I suspect you would differ
from me on this one. On the other hand, I tend to agree that the Tiqqune
Sopherim are unlikely to be genuine changes, at least in the absence of
support from LXX or other ancient versions or MSS.
> Overall, accessible scholarship is very spotty, and even confusing at times, with the alternative paradigms not clearly laid out.. The Bullinger view gets the public limelight, and then gets picked up by a lot of non-scholars and plastered over the web :-)
This is what happens when modern scholars and authors (and their
publishers) protect their copyright: their views may become well
accepted in narrow scholarly circles, but they don't get on the Internet
and so don't get the wide publicity. So, scholars, I challenge you to
publish your work on the Internet, in places where it can be read by all
free of charge.
peter at qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.3 - Release Date: 03/05/2005
More information about the b-hebrew