Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Rolf" <rolf.furuli AT sf-nett.no>]

Dear Steven,

Your posts show that you have a particular religious agenda, and that is 
against the rules of b-hebrew.
So I see no reason why I should answer you.


Best regards,


Rolf Furuli
Stavern
Norway 
 
 
Mandag 10. Juni 2013 17:32 CEST skrev Steven Avery <stevenavery AT verizon.net>: 
 
> Hi,
> 
> Putting aside the group posting history, the point that I am making 
> to Rolf Furuli about scribal habits and textual transmission are simple.
> 
> If your theory of a New Testament text with Hebrew words originally 
> embedded does not reference clearly and astutely the following four issues:
> 
> 1) Why a diverse variety of writers (allowing they were all Hebrew 
> fluent and skilled) would all do the exact same highly unusual 
> autographic Greek writing, of interrupting their Greek flow to change 
> to a Hebrew script for one word here and there.  Today we have no 
> evidence at all that this was ever done. And various gentlemen only 
> guess the places this happened by their particular 
> doctrinal-Christological need (NWT) or, as here, they tentatively 
> limit the question to happening to NT quotes of OT scripture.   No 
> matter what, you are placing the exact same unusual writing, never 
> seen in autographic Greek, as changing the style of a variety NT 
> authors, and nobody else.
> 
> 2) Why every single case of this occurring in the autographs was 
> never recognized in either the manuscript lines, in any Greek, Latin 
> or even Syriac texts.  And the conjectured phenomenon was never 
> referenced even once by the ECW who talked about the texts.  In other 
> words, there is no trace.
> 
> 3) Why every single one of these cases got redacted into our current 
> text, ie. The phenomenon then vanished without a trace. Why did they 
> not have a variety of redactions, such as transliterating YHVW or 
> Jehovah and a wide divergence between kurios and qeos in many 
> instances?  Why the general textual consistency today?  Surely such a 
> cumbersome redaction back into the Greek and Latin texts would leave 
> lots of variant signs in addition to historical notes.
> 
> 4) Acknowledge that this is simply a master emendation theory, of no 
> textual evidence. Under this theory, the proper NT text was totally 
> hid for 1800 years, and is restored by conjectural emendation, all 
> done against 1-2-3.
> 
> If these issues are not addressed, then I think it is fair to say 
> that your theory is of no merit.  Granted, I do not think they were 
> addressed by those who earlier floated similar theories, whether it 
> be George Howard or David Trobisch, however that is no reason for not 
> addressing them today.
> 
> ==================
> 
> Please note that I often find Rolf's writings, and even JW writings, 
> of some interest.  The acknowledgement of the name as Jehovah rather 
> than yahweh or other modern attempts is extra-fine ( I wonder if Rolf 
> has any specific critiques of the Nehemia Gordon material, beyond the 
> light dismissal he wrote.)   Their concerns about the development of 
> the Trinity doctrine are interesting, even if I do not share their 
> general Christology. Rolf has written interestingly on John 1:18, as 
> I remember.
> 
> However, I see some gaping holes in the New Testament 
> emendation-redaction theory being propounded here.
> 
> ==================
> 
> Shalom,
> Steven Avery
> Bayside, NY. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew