To: phil-eng AT ighmail.com, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Relative ages of LXX, DSS and proto-MT texts
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 18:26:31 EST
In a message dated 3/4/2004 4:18:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
phil-eng AT ighmail.com writes:
It would appear that the LXX could be older than DSS. Using the criteria
that the oldest text is usually more authentic, DSS fails as an
independent witness authenticating either MT or LXX.
_______
Others have responded to various parts of your post. I therefore direct
attention to your assumption that the oldest text is usually more authentic.
Since you state "usually", this is most likely true; but it is not
necessarily
true that older texts are more authentic than later texts. Errors can enter
the
transmission process at any point -- including in the original production.
How often have I written something only to discover on picking it up again
that
I misspelled a word or even omitted a word? This is the reason that there
are
a number of criteria in textual criticism and not simply that of the age of
the manuscript.
gfsomsel
RE: [b-hebrew] Relative ages of LXX, DSS and proto-MT texts
, (continued)