Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Romans 8:1

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Robert A Bayer <robertbayer AT juno.com>
  • To: corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Cc: corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: Romans 8:1
  • Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 13:09:48 -0400



On Tue, 17 Jul 2001 14:41:08 +0100 pmh15 AT cam.ac.uk (Peter M. Head)
writes:
> Frank Anthony wrote:
> >I'd like some help understanding the evidence given for the shorter
> > reading of Romans 8:1. I'm not competent in the area of manuscript
>> evidence, so I'd like a summary of why the shorter version is
preferred. (I myself
> prefer the shorter version, I just wish to defend it.)
>
> Why bother with the evidence when you've already decided the
> conclusion?
> Real evidence will only complicate things.
>
>

Pardon me for jumping in. I've been on this list from it's beginning but
mostly I lurk. Recently in my own studies I've been giving a lot of
thought to the text of Romans 8:1 but the issues involved are also beyond
my competence. Perhaps, this is not the forum for the ignorant to ask
for help. If not, is there a place where those more competent in textual
criticism will help some one who has not yet decided the conclusion?

I could write a much more about my own thoughts regarding this text but I
doubt that would be expedient here. However, I was hoping that some
would respond to Frank's question with reason and evidence that would
aide me in understanding the evidence for this text, which strikes me as
being more complex and significant than most.

Sincerely,

Bob Bayer
Winchendon MA, USA



  • Romans 8:1, Ntsearcher, 07/15/2001
    • <Possible follow-up(s)>
    • Re: Romans 8:1, Peter M. Head, 07/17/2001
    • Re: Romans 8:1, Robert A Bayer, 07/17/2001

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page