DOCSLIB.ORG

BOOK REVIEWS MAURICE A. ROBINSON and WILLIS G

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BOOK REVIEWS MAURICE A. ROBINSON and WILLIS G BOOK REVIEWS MAURICEA. ROBINSONand WILLISG. PIERPONT,The New Testamentin the Original Greek accordingto the ByzantinelMajorityTextform (Atlanta: Original Word Publishers, 1991), pp. lvii & 510. U.S. $24.95 paperback. Those who have been reluctant to encourage the monopolizing tendencies of the United Bible Societies by accepting their Greek New Testament (or Nestle- Aland26) as a text that until recently was promoting itself as the "standard" text have at their disposal several different editions that really are standard texts, in the sense that they are all attempts to represent the Byzantine type of text. There is the Patriarchal New Testament of 1904 used by the orthodox Church: this is based on the text of the lectionaries and in that sense can be seen as a genuine liv- ing text; the Trinitarian Bible Society markets a version of the Textus Receptus based on Scrivener's edition of Beza's 1598 text which underlies the New Testa- ment of the Authorized version; then in 1982 (2 1985)Hodges and Farstad's Greek New Testament according to the Majority Text ( = H&F) appeared. This latest edition makes a fourth. Robinson and Pierpont ( = R&P) have issued a Byzantine text, the title to which deliberately recalls the title to Westcott and Hort's New Testament of 1881. R&P's main aim is to produce a text that agrees with the distinctively Byzantine mss. and not one that necessarily agrees with the bulk of extant mss.. It would be of interest to have been given a list of the readings they print that do not have the support of the majority of mss.. They have not attempted to establish their text by means of a sheer count of mss., especially where the Byzantine texts are divided among themselves. R&P generally follow von Soden's K group and his Kx in par- ticular but they are not concerned to accept the majority for its own sake. The use of the word 'majority' in their title is there 'solely to provide a link with the popularly-espoused concept of "Majority Text" theory' (p. liii). They speak of a Byzantine text form rather than a text-type, because in their theory the Byzantine text represents the original text-it was not a recension or a revision, but a text that survived from the beginning. The.editors' history of the text is spelled out in their Introduction. They argue that the autograph copies were corrupted early and this accounts for the variety of text-types in the earliest extant mss. but that after Constantine the conditions were appropriate for the church gradually to set about establishing a more or less unified text of the New Testament created from the reliable readings in a wide spectrum of mss.. This text was deemed to be the original text, and it was the text we call the Byzantine text. Quite how "the church" recognised a reliable text from a secondary reading is not made clear. There are other queries and difficulties in the editors' reconstruction of the history of the text, although it is commendable that they have acknowledged that textual criticism requires its practitioners to show an awareness that the New Testament ms. tradition does indeed have a history! Conventional arguments against theories favouring the Byzantine text such as the lack of early Byzantine mss. and the alleged paucity of Byzantine readings in the early fathers are dealt with by the editors in their Introduction. They take comfort from Harry Sturz's work that shows links between readings in the early papyri and late Byzantine mss. and they argue, probably convincingly, that modern critics are so preoccupied in avoiding readings found in early mss. 198 that happen to be in agreement with Byzantine readings that the high percentage of such "Byzantine" readings in early mss. is overlooked. As far as the fathers are concerned a similar argument is employed, namely that scholars this century have been blind to the high proportion of Byzantine readings in a patristic citation. R&P are not prepared to accept the oft-stated view that any Byzantine-type reading in a patristic text is likely to be the result of a later scribe's harmonizing of a Biblical citation to the prevailing text (scil. Byzantine) in his own day. Arguments such as these make it increasingly necessary for the sympathetic or uncommitted scholar (which should include every true scholar!) to investigate the character of all Biblical citations in all early church fathers (possibly using Asterius as a fulcrum) within the text-critical history of the patristic text itself. The major problems I have with R&P's history are a) how the Byzantine text emerged as the dominant text from amidst the freewheeling and chaotic conditions hitherto prevailing and b) why that resultant text represents the original words of the original authors. I have no difficulty in accepting that the bulk of deliberate changes in the New Testament are likely to have been in existence prior to 200 A.D., as orthodox scribes would have been disinclined to tamper with holy writ once it had achieved canonical status, and no-one can deny the eventual dominance of the Byzantine text, but it does seem to be just as much a leap in the dark to say that the Byzantine text emerged, reconstructed and reestablished through a gradual process by which the church came to realise that this text-type and no other preserved the monopoly of original readings (a process that the editors seem to imply was due to the self-evidence of truth-they are too scholarly to allow words like providential protection on to their pages) than to say, as many still do, that this text-type was the result of a formal revision officially authorized even though there is no historical evidence for such a revision being instigated. Could it not equally be possible that what we call the Byzantine text-type emerged from the local texts found in a part of the church that remained Greek speaking after other areas e.g. in Egypt, N. Africa, W. Europe and the Middle East had jettisoned Greek mss. in favour of their own vernaculars? But even if we grant R&P their historical reconstruction, there is no guarantee that their printed text is the original more so than any other. Often, Byzantine readings may be original but this judgement can only be arrived at after each variant is discussed on its own merits case by case. Now to the text itself. There are some 1500 differences between this edition (and indeed H&F) and any edition of the Textus Receptus ( = TR). This text lacks Acts 8:37; 9:5b-6a; 15:34; 24:7; I John 2:23b; 5:7b and (depending on which edition of the TR is used) Luke 17:36. The order of Matt. 23:13 and 14 is reversed. The doxology at Rom. 16:25 is given as 14:24-6. Elsewhere the Trinitarian Society's TR differs from R&P (and H&F) at e.g. Matt. 3:8 3:11 + xai 4:18 + 6 5:47 &8e?c?ouS(TR = NA 26!)/ Inevitably the resultant text differs but little from H&F. When the majority is divided, especially over a a.l. that gives a choice between a longer and a shorter text, the word(s) in dispute are often found bracketed in this new edition. But there are other differences between H&F and R&P, e.g. Matt. 11 : 16H&F: i-c6potqR&P: ?Taipov5;Acts 4:17 7:38 22:12 su?a[ii?5 / Eph.5:21 1 0eo6/xpi?1Io6;II Tim 1:1Xpvaiou 'I71aou/'Incro6XpLa-zo5; jas.5:11 1 d'3&'ce The biggest differences between these editions occur in the pericope of the adulteress and in the Book of Revelation. H&F adopted a stemmatic approach in the mss. they used for these sections. The main differences in the adulteress passage are as follows: John 8:11 H&F: xal 6 'Irlaous / R&P: 8e; 8:2 fia0img /-; fiX0ev/ 1t\Xp?¡év?'to;6 'ITiao5?/ -; 1tpOçal<6v / [ ] ; 8:3 èv / iv 8:4 d1toV/ .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?
    2 Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek? Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek? A Concise Compendium of the Many Internal and External Evidences of Aramaic Peshitta Primacy Publication Edition 1a, May 2008 Compiled by Raphael Christopher Lataster Edited by Ewan MacLeod Cover design by Stephen Meza © Copyright Raphael Christopher Lataster 2008 Foreword 3 Foreword A New and Powerful Tool in the Aramaic NT Primacy Movement Arises I wanted to set down a few words about my colleague and fellow Aramaicist Raphael Lataster, and his new book “Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?” Having written two books on the subject myself, I can honestly say that there is no better free resource, both in terms of scope and level of detail, available on the Internet today. Much of the research that myself, Paul Younan and so many others have done is here, categorized conveniently by topic and issue. What Raphael though has also accomplished so expertly is to link these examples with a simple and unambiguous narrative style that leaves little doubt that the Peshitta Aramaic New Testament is in fact the original that Christians and Nazarene-Messianics have been searching for, for so long. The fact is, when Raphael decides to explore a topic, he is far from content in providing just a few examples and leaving the rest to the readers’ imagination. Instead, Raphael plumbs the depths of the Aramaic New Testament, and offers dozens of examples that speak to a particular type. Flip through the “split words” and “semi-split words” sections alone and you will see what I mean.
    [Show full text]
  • Novum Testamentum Graece Nestle-Aland 28Th Edition Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    NOVUM TESTAMENTUM GRAECE NESTLE-ALAND 28TH EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Eberhard Nestle | 9781619700307 | | | | | Novum Testamentum Graece Nestle-Aland 28th edition PDF Book Book ratings by Goodreads. It is a very nice sewn binding. Three reasons for ordering Reasonable prices International shipping Secure payment. Answer: Thank you for your question. You are commenting using your Twitter account. Follow us. No additional fonts needed. Holman Christian Standard. Das neue Testament Griechisch A must see site! Canons and books. The site also containscomputer software containing the versions and free Bible study tools. American Standard Version. We try our best to provide a competitive shipping experience for our customers. When I find out I will post the information as an update. This edition introduced a separate critical apparatus and finally introduced consistency to the majority reading principle. It is sewn and flexible. The New Testament arrived in a cardboard box from Hendrickson. It feels like a high quality Bible paper. Aland submitted his work on NA to the editorial committee of the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament of which he was also a member and it became the basic text of their third edition UBS3 in , four years before it was published as the 26th edition of Nestle-Aland. The Greek text of the 28th edition is the same as that of the 5th edition of the United Bible Societies The Greek New Testament abbreviated UBS5 although there are a few differences between them in paragraphing, capitalization, punctuation and spelling. Essential We use cookies to provide our services , for example, to keep track of items stored in your shopping basket, prevent fraudulent activity, improve the security of our services, keep track of your specific preferences e.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact and Influence of Erasmus's Greek New Testament
    HISTORICAL STUDIES The Impact and Influence of Erasmus’s Greek New Testament PETER J. GOEMAN Abstract Although often eclipsed by the giants of the Reformation, Desiderius Erasmus had a notable influence on the Reformation and the world that followed. Responsible for five editions of the Greek New Testament, his contributions include a renewed emphasis on the Greek over against the Latin of the day, as well as influence on subsequent Greek New Testaments and many translations, including Luther’s German Bible and the English King James Version. In God’s providence, Erasmus provided kindling for the fire of the Reformation.1 “ he name of Erasmus shall never perish.” Time has proved these words, spoken by one of his friends in the early 1500s, to be true. Today, Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam is recognized as a key figure—especially in regard to his influence on Bible translation and textual criticism. Although his fame has been Tsuperseded by the heroes of the Reformation, many of them were benefi- ciaries of his hard work. The Reformers owed him much. In the English- speaking world, the average person may not know Erasmus’s name, yet those who read the Bible today are indebted both to his contribution and to those he influenced. 1 I would like to thank my friends and colleagues Abner Chou and Will Varner for reading an earlier version of this article and providing valuable feedback. 69 70 UNIO CUM CHRISTO ›› UNIOCC.COM Much has been written about Erasmus’s life, and this article will focus on his work on the Greek New Testament.
    [Show full text]
  • The Solid Rock Greek New Testament : Theory and Practice
    The Solid Rock Greek New Testament: Theory and Practice Joey McCollum Abstract The Solid Rock Greek New Testament: Scholar’s Edition offers a recon- structed text of the New Testament based on Byzantine priority theory and expands upon the work of the SBL Greek New Testament by compar- ing the readings of over 10 major critical editions at nearly 8000 units of textual variation. In this survey, we will discuss the goals, principles, and processes underlying the development of this edition, focusing especially on the design and use of the apparatus. As we will show, the resources available in this work make it a valuable addition to the library of anyone involved in the teaching, translation, or study of the Greek New Testament. 1 Introduction 1.1 New Testament Textual Criticism For nearly as long as the Church has recognized the scriptures of the New Testament (ΝΤ) as authoritative, it has also understood that not all copies of these scriptures agree with one another.¹ If we assume that each book of the NT originated in a single inspired autograph, then any two manuscripts cannot both be right where they disagree.² More to the point, where any difference 1. The early church fathers occasionally took note of such differences in the manuscripts known to them. For this reason, their notes serve as crucial evidence for variant readings, sometimes in cases when the reading in the patristic citation has not survived in any NT manuscript. A comprehensive study can be found in Amy M. Donaldson, “Explicit References to New Testament Variant Readings among Greek and Latin Church Fathers” (PhD diss., University of Notre Dame, 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Translating the New Testament
    Translating the New Testament Text, Translation, Theology Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Mark J. Boda William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company Grand Rapids, Michigan / Cambridge, U.K. 2009 McMaster New Testament Studies The McMaster New Testament Studies series, edited by Stanley E. Porter, is designed to address particular themes in the New Testament that are of concern to Christians today. Written in a style easily accessible to minis­ ters, students, and laypeople by contributors who are proven experts in their fields of study, the volumes in this series reflect the best of current biblical scholarship while also speaking directly to the pastoral needs of people in the church today. © 2009 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. All rights reserved Published 2009 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2140 Oak Industrial Drive N.E., Grand Rapids, Michigan 49505 / P.O. Box 163, Cambridge CB3 9PU U.K. Printed in the United States of America 14 13 12 11 10 09 7654321 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Translating the New Testament: text, translation, theology I edited by Stanley E. Porter and Mark J. Boda. p. cm. — (McMaster New Testament studies) Proceedings of a colloquium held in May 2005 at McMaster Divinity College, Hamilton, Ont. Includes index. ISBN 978-0-8028-6377-5 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Bible. N.T. — Translating — Congresses. I. Porter, Stanley E., 1956- II. Boda, Mark J. BS449.T7475 2009 220.501 — dc22 2009023800 www.eerdmans.c Southern Baptist Theolnqical Serina*' Lbr? -v 2fl?5 L<jxing?cn Rd. Louisville, κγ 4U28O Contents Preface ix Contributors xii Abbreviations xiv Translating the New Testament: An Introduction to Issues of Text, Translation, and Theology 1 Stanley E.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Original Greek Text of the New Testament
    Notes on the Original Greek Text of the New Testament Michael A. Covington Program in Linguistics, The University of Georgia New in this version: Major update to pronunciation section. This document is available on the Web at http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/nttext.pdf. 14th complete draft, 2004 September 18 Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Author’squalifications . 3 2 The New Testament as Holy Scripture 4 2.1 Validityofhistoricalstudy . 4 2.2 Formationofthecanon. .. .. 4 2.3 Protestantvs.Catholicvs.Orthodox . 5 2.4 Biblicalquackery ......................... 5 2.5 Lower vs. higher criticism . 6 3 How the New Testament got to us 7 3.1 Typesofmanuscripts. .. .. 8 3.2 Whymanuscriptsdiffer. 8 3.3 Texttypes............................. 10 3.4 PrintededitionsoftheGreekNT . 12 3.5 Recentdevelopments . 13 3.5.1 Greater confidence in Byzantine text type? . 13 3.5.2 Earlierdatingofpapyri. 14 4 Translating the New Testament 15 4.1 WhatGreekislike ........................ 15 4.2 TheKingJamesVersion . 16 4.2.1 Italicized words in the King James Version . 18 4.3 Moderntranslations . 18 4.4 Aremoretranslationsneeded? . 20 1 5 The inclusive-language issue 21 5.1 Whygenderisaproblem. 21 5.2 Controversies over “inclusive” translations . ... 22 5.3 My opinion on inclusive language . 25 6 Pronunciation of New Testament Greek 26 6.1 TheKoin¯esituation. 26 6.2 Normalpractice.......................... 26 6.3 Aneweralternative. .. .. 27 6.4 Contextofthedispute . 28 6.5 InpraiseofErasmus’folly . 28 7 Specific Greek words and phrases 29 8 Specific textual problems 29 8.1 Gospels .............................. 29 8.2 Acts ................................ 33 8.3 EpistlesofPaul .......................... 33 8.4 GeneralEpistles.......................... 37 8.5 Revelation............................. 39 9 What about the Old Testament? 39 2 1 Introduction The purpose of this paper is to present, in concise form, some basic information about the New Testament compiled for my own use.
    [Show full text]
  • The Textual History of the Greek New Testament Society of Biblical Literature
    The Textual History of the Greek New Testament Society of Biblical Literature Text-Critical Studies Editor Sidnie White Crawford Number 8 The Textual History of the Greek New Testament The Textual History of the Greek New Testament Changing Views in Contemporary Research Edited by Klaus Wachtel and Michael W. Holmes Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta The Textual History of the Greek New Testament Copyright © 2011 by the Society of Biblical Literature All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the publisher. Requests for permission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Office, Society of Biblical Literature, 825 Houston Mill Road, Atlanta, GA 30329 USA. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The textual history of the Greek New Testament / edited by Klaus Wachtel and Michael W. Holmes. p. cm. — (Society of Biblical Literature text-critical studies ; no. 8) Proceedings of a colloquium held in 2008 in M?nster, Germany. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-58983-624-2 (paper binding : alk. paper) — ISBN 978-1-58983-625-9 (electronic format) 1. Bible. N.T.—Criticism, Textual—Congresses. I. Wachtel, Klaus. II. Holmes, Michael W. (Michael William), 1950- BS2325.T49 2011 225.4'86—dc23 2011042791 Printed on acid-free, recycled paper conforming to ANSI /NISO Z39.48–1992 (R1997) and ISO 9706:1994 standards for paper permanence.
    [Show full text]
  • Uma Bíblia Completa Ou Uma Bíblia Tentativa?
    UMA BÍBLIA COMPLETA OU UMA BÍBLIA TENTATIVA? Por David C. Bennett (DCB), D. Min. Traduzido do Google por Pastor Rui Dias Depois que uma pessoa vem pela fé ao Senhor Jesus Cristo como seu Salvador pessoal da penalidade e poder do pecado (Efésios 2: 8 Porque pela graça sois salvos, por meio da fé e Romanos 10:17). Então, a fé vem pelo ouvir e ouvir pela palavra de Deus . ), sua nova vida está basicamente envolvida na fé; fé em Deus e fé na Palavra de Deus (2 Coríntios 5: 7 (Porque andamos pela fé , não pela vista :) ! O crente então (ou pelo menos) deve ter o desejo de memorizar a Palavra de Deus para não pecar contra Ele (Salmo 119: 11 Tua palavra escondi em meu coração, para não pecar contra ti . ). Eles tomam a Sua Palavra como um conforto quando o mundo se opõe a eles (Salmo 119: 42 Então terei o que responder àquele que me afronta: pois confio na Tua palavra. ) E permitem que a Sua Palavra os guie enquanto caminham este mundo obscurecido pelo pecado amaldiçoado (Salmo 119: 105 Tua palavra é uma lâmpada para os meus pés e uma luz para o meu caminho ). Com essas coisas em mente, eu pergunto: é, portanto, importante se a Palavra de Deus é completa e totalmente verdadeira ou simplesmente provisória? A maioria diria que sim, é muito importante que a Palavra de Deus seja completa e, nisso, também é totalmente verdadeira. Como outro escreveu. Como podemos ter certeza de que tudo na Bíblia é verdade? Como podemos ter certeza de que Jesus Cristo é quem disse ser, ou mesmo que existiu, se a Bíblia não é infalível? [1] Por inerrante entende-se sem erro ou engano.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Proofs of the New Testament, Suggest Peshitta Primacy – Part 1
    Historical Proofs of the New Testament, Suggest Peshitta Primacy – Part 1 Compiled by Christopher Lancaster I have discussed many of the linguistic proofs of Peshitta primacy, which is perhaps the best proof we can have, as it is internal evidence. There is however much external evidence also, such as quotes from Church fathers, and simple (yet little-known) facts about Jesus’ time (and language), that also make a strong case for Peshitta primacy. This article will deal with some historical proofs of Peshitta primacy, and will also touch on other issues, such as the Septuagint, and the other Aramaic Bible versions. 1. The Aramaic language Aramaic is an ancient Semitic language (very similar to Hebrew) that according to the Encyclopedia Britannica, became the dominant language of the Middle East, around 500-600 years before the birth of the Messiah. “Aramaic is thought to have first appeared among the Aramaeans about the late 11th century BC. By the 8th century BC it had become accepted by the Assyrians as a second language. The mass deportations of people by the Assyrians and the use of Aramaic as a lingua franca by Babylonian merchants served to spread the language, so that in the 7th and 6th centuries BC it gradually supplanted Akkadian as the lingua franca of the Middle East.” – Encyclopedia Britannica “The Persians used the Aramaic language because this tongue was the language of the two Semitic empires, the empire of Assyria and the empire of Babylon. Aramaic was so firmly established as the lingua franca that no government could dispense with its use as a vehicle of expression in a far-flung empire, especially in the western provinces.
    [Show full text]
  • New Testament Textual Criticism the Application of Thoroughgoing Principles
    New Testament Textual Criticism The Application of Thoroughgoing Principles Press SBL Supplements to Novum Testamentum Editors M. M. Mitchell D. P. Moessner Editorial Board L. Alexander, F. Bovon, C. Breytenbach J. K. Elliott, C. R. Holladay, M. J. J. Menken, J. Smit Sibinga, J. C. Thom, P. Trebilco Press Volume 137 SBL New Testament Textual Criticism The Application of Thoroughgoing Principles Essays on Manuscripts and Textual Variation J. K. Elliott Press SBL Press SBLAtlanta Copyright © 2010 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands This edition published under license from Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands by SBL Press. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or trans- mitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, includ- ing photocopying and recording, or by any means of any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted by the 1976 Copyright Act or in writing from the Publisher. Requests for per- mission should be addressed in writing to the Rights and Permissions Department, Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is grant- ed by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Elliott, J. K. (James Keith), author. New Testament textual criticism : the application of thoroughgoing principles / by J.K. Elliott. pages cm — (Supplements to Novum Testamentum ; volume 137) ISBN 978-1-62837-028-7 (paper binding : alk.
    [Show full text]
  • Greek Orthodox Bible : New Testament
    THE EASTERN - GREEK ORTHODOX BIBLE : NEW TESTAMENT Presented to Presented by Date – Occasion THE EASTERN - GREEK ORTHODOX BIBLE NEW TESTAMENT THE EASTERN / GREEK ORTHODOX BIBLE BASED ON THE SEPTUAGINT AND THE PATRIARCHAL TEXT NEW TESTAMENT ALSO KNOWN AS THE CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES With extensive introductory and supplemental material The EOB New Testament is presented in memory of Archbishop Vsevolod of Scopelos (†2007) Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople And in honor of His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah Primate of the Orthodox Church in America ABBREVIATIONS AND CODES Indicates words added for clarity and accuracy but which may not [ ] be in the Greek text. For public reading, these words can be included or skipped Indicates words added for theological clarity and accuracy. For { } public reading, these words should be skipped Indicates words that may have been added in the Byzantine textual tradition for the purpose of clarification, harmonization or liturgical < > use and which are present in the PT, but which may not have been part of the original manuscripts ANF/PNF Ante-Nicene Fathers / Post-Nicene Fathers BAC Being as Communion, John Zizioulas CCC Catechism of the Catholic Church Modern “eclectic” texts or reconstructed "critical texts" (United CT Bible Societies Text (UBS) or the Nestle-Aland Text (NA)) CTC Called to Communion, Joseph Ratzinger EBC Eucharist, Bishop, Church, John Zizioulas EOB Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible HBB His Broken Body, Laurent Cleenewerck HE Ecclesiastical History (Eusebius) (Paul Maier’s edition) KJV King James Version (sometimes called Authorized Version) Greek translation of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint LXX which is the basis for the main English text of the EOB/OT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY SECTION ABBREVIATIONS AND CODES ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Erasmus' Latin New Testament
    A Most Perilous Journey ERASMUS’ GREEK NEW TESTAMENT AT 500 YEARS CURATED BY RICHARD M. ADAMS, JR. JULY 15, 2016 — SEPT 15, 2016 PITTS THEOLOGY LIBRARY 1 A Most Perilous Journey: Erasmus’ Greek New Testament at 500 Years “I have edited the New Five hundred years ago, the great Dutch humanist Desiderius Erasmus Testament, and much of Rotterdam (1466-1536) published the first Greek New Testament besides; and in order to and a new Latin translation, a landmark event in the development do a service to the reading of the Bible and a sign of the emphasis on returning ad fontes (“to public I have thought the sources”) that characterized developing reforms of the church. nothing of a most perilous This exhibit celebrates the milestone by displaying all five editions of journey, nothing of the Erasmus’ Greek New Testament produced during his lifetime, allowing expense, nothing at all of visitors to trace how the text changed over the decades of Erasmus’ the toils in which I have work. Alongside these rare Erasmus editions, items in the exhibit worn out a great part of highlight the changing form of the Bible in the sixteenth century my health and life itself.” and the development of Erasmus as a scholar and his philological and theological work in this critical time of reform. In response to receiving Erasmus’ first edition of the Greek New Testament, his friend John Colet (1466-1519), Dean at St. Paul’s Cathedral, wrote, “The name of Erasmus shall never perish.” We welcome you to this exhibit, celebrating the fact that after 500 years the sentiment remains strong.
    [Show full text]