Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Psalm 14 'smoothed' to Romans 3 in Greek OT

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: Schmuel <schmuel AT nyc.rr.com>
  • Cc: "b-hebrew-lists.ibiblio.org" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Psalm 14 'smoothed' to Romans 3 in Greek OT
  • Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:12:40 +0500

On 18/10/2006 18:18, Schmuel wrote:
...
In contrast, the Greek NT in the great majority of manuscripts was rather
homogeneous (the Byzantine Text) with reasonably high copyist standards
(although not up to the Masoretic Text). Only in recent years has there been
a tendency to elevate a couple of clearly scribally-deficient texts. That
is, since the late 19th century. Texts full of scribal blunders became the
darlings of the text-critical crowd. Codex Sinaiticus especially, but also
similarly Codex Vaticanus and Codex Bezae come to mind (although the usage of
Bezae is less). Vaticanus and Sinaticus are also at the base of Greek OT
(LXX) studies although the Orthodox (Christians with the Byzantine Text) I
believe disclaim their individual significance and have their own text.

This discussion of NT text criticism is clearly off topic, but it is also clearly in error and so I must correct it. I accept that by the later Byzantine times copies may have been made to a reasonably high standard as well as in large numbers, but this is effectively irrelevant because they are copies of a textual tradition which had already become seriously corrupt during the Byzantine period, with for example many very obvious interpolations and adjustments to make the text correspond to Byzantine theology. Just because there are a large number of almost identical copies of something, that by no means implies that that something is in itself reliable or of high quality. Meanwhile the recent (20th rather than 19th century) scholarly text critics base their studies and their critical texts of the NT on a rather large selection of early manuscripts, not largely on the two or three which you mention. In fact the introduction to the standard Nestle-Aland 27th edition lists hundreds of papyri and uncials which are "consistently cited witnesses of the first order" used as the main basis of their text.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
Blog: http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page