DOCSLIB.ORG

301 Matt. 10:3 “Lebbaeus, Whose Surname Was Thaddaeus” (TR & AV

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
301 Matt. 10:3 “Lebbaeus, Whose Surname Was Thaddaeus” (TR & AV 301 Matt. 10:3 “Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus” (TR & AV) {A} Preliminary Textual Discussion. Scribes sometimes missed short words. E.g., here at Matt. 10:3 in Lectionary 1968, the “ o (the) tou ([son] of)” before “ Alphaiou (Alphaeus),” is omitted. But for our purposes this does not affect the relevant reading we are considering. Principal Textual Discussion. At Matt. 10:3 the TR’s Greek reading, “Lebbaios (Lebbaeus) o (who) epikletheis (was surnamed) Thaddaios (Thaddaeus),” i.e., “Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus,” is supported by the majority Byzantine Text e.g., W 032 (5th century, which is Byzantine in Matt. 1-28; Luke 8:13-24:53), Sigma 042 (late 5th / 6th century, with diverse spelling, “Lebbeos ”), N 022 (6th century, with diverse spellings, “ Lebbeos ” and “ Thaddeos ”); Minuscules 1010 (12th century) and 597 (13th century); and Lectionary 1968 (1544 A.D.). It is also supported as Latin, “ Lebbeus (Lebbaeus) qui (who) nominatur (is named) Taddeus (Thaddaeus ),” in old Latin Version f (6th century). It is further supported by the ancient church Greek writers, the Apostolic Constitutions (3rd or 4th century) and Chrysostom (d. 407). However another reading, Variant 1 , may be reconstructed from the Latin as Greek, “Thaddaios (Thaddaeus)” (cf. Variant 2 Greek and Latin forms). It is followed as Latin, “Thaddaeus ” in Jerome’s Latin Vulgate (5th century), and as Latin, “ Thaddeus ” in old Latin Versions aur (7th century), 1 (7th / 8th century), ff1 (10th / 11th century), and c (12th / 13th century). It is also followed by the ancient church Latin writers, Jerome (d. 420) and Augustine (d. 430). From the Latin support for this reading, the Vulgate’s reading is manifested in the Clementine Vulgate (1592). Yet another reading, Variant 2 , reads only, Greek, “ Lebbaios (Lebbaeus).” Variant 2 is followed as Latin, “ Lebbeus ” in old Latin Version d (5th century). It is also followed by the ancient church Greek writer, Origen (d. 254) in a Latin translation, and is found in a manuscript according to the ancient church Latin writer, Augustine (d. 430). Another reading, Latin, “ Iebbacus ,” Variant 3 , is followed by old Latin Version k (4th / 5th centuries). Another reading, Latin, “ Iudas (Judas) Zelotes (Zealotes) et (and) Thomas (Thomas),” Variant 4 , is followed by old Latin Versions a (4th century), b (5th century), and q (6th / 7th century). Another reading, Latin, “Iudas (Judas) Zelotes (Zealotes), Variant 5 , is followed in old Latin Versions h (5th century) and g1 (8th / 9th century) 1. There is no good textual argument against the representative Byzantine reading which is therefore correct. The origins of Variant 1 , 2, 3, and 4 are speculative. It is possible that Variant’s 1 and 2 were accidental, resulting from ellipsis in the “ eus ” endings of Latin 1 Indicating a failure to understand the context, the UBS textual apparatus combines Variants 4 and 5 as one variant, i.e., simply, Iudas Zelotes . With qualification, one can say Variant 4 supports the basic reading of Variant 5, with respect to the words, Iudas Zelotes , or vice versa , but this is not what the UBS textual apparatus says. 302 “Lebbeus ” and “ Thaddeus. ” If the Variants originated in the Greek and not the Latin, the same issue of ellipsis could explain how the “ aois ” endings of “ Lebbaios ” and “ Thaddaios ” confused different fatigued or inattentive scribes in different ways, so that in one instance, “Lebbaios (Lebbaeus) o (who) epikletheis (was surnamed)” was lost, when a scribe reading forward, and then looking back, and remembering he was up to the “ aois ” ending wrote down “Thaddaios (Thaddaeus)” and kept going (Variant 1 ); whereas in another instance, a scribe first writing down “ Lebbaios (Lebbaeus)” then looked forward in the passages and back to the “ aois ” ending of “ Thaddaios (Thaddaeus),” and kept writing ( Variant 2 ). Of course, it is also possible that these were deliberate “stylistic improvements.” We simply so not know for sure. We only know that somehow these errors arose. Variant 3 may have originated from a paper loss or fade. The original manuscript probably contained Variant 2 . But the “ Lebbeus ” may have appeared as “ :ebb::us ” and the scribe then wrongly “reconstructed” this as “ Iebbacus .” If so, there is a sense in which Variant 3 may be said to be the same as Variant 2 . Variant 4 may have originated from a paper loss or fade. The original manuscript probably contained the TR’s reading. But the “ Lebbeus qui nominatur Taddeus ” may have appeared as “ ::::::::s ::::::o::::::t::::T:::::::s .” The scribe may have “reconstructed” this as “Iudas (Judas)” with reference to the “ Iudas (Judas) Scarioth (Iscariot)” of the next verse; and then thinking a surname was required to distinguish it from “ Scarioth (Iscariot),” “reconstructed” the “ Zelotes ” by interpreting “ Chananaeus ” (old Latin a) or “ Cananeus ” (old Latin b and q), as Simon “Cananaean” with the meaning, “Zealot” (see Matt. 10:4, infra ). He may then have concluded that “ et Thomas ” was the only thing that could be left, and gotten this from the previous “ Thomas ” in the same verse after “ Bartholomeus ,” wrongly thinking that a previous scribe had somehow inadvertently put the name in twice. Hence, he may then removed the earlier reference to “Thomas.” Thus with some incompetence, this may have given rise to a “reconstruction” in old Latin a (4th century), b (5th century), q (6th / 7th century), that omitted the first “ Thomas ,” and reads, of “ Iudas (Judas) Zelotes (Zealotes) et (and) Thomas (Thomas)” ( Variant 4 ). A later assimilation by another Latin scribe of this reading with other Latin readings containing the earlier “ Thomas ,” may then account for the fact that the earlier “ Thomas ” is present in old Latin h (5th century) and g1 (8th / 9th century), which then omit the “ et (and) Thomas (Thomas)” of Variant 4 , while retaining the Iudas (Judas) Zelotes (Zealotes) ( Variant 5 ). If so, there is a qualified sense in which Variants 4 and 5 may be said to support the reading of the TR. The TR’s reading has strong support from the Greek, including St. Chrysostom, and some minority support in the Latin; with no good textual argument against it. On the one hand, we cannot be sure as to the origins of Variants 1-4; but on the other hand, Variants 1 and 2 look like typical examples of ellipsis, and Variants 3 and 4 look like typical examples of “reconstructions” following paper fades or losses. Though the Latin favours Variants 1-4; it seems to me that this is a good example of the superiority of the maxim, The Greek improves the Latin . On the system of rating textual readings A to E, I would give the TR’s reading at Matt. 10:3 an “A” i.e., the text of the TR is the correct reading and has a high level of certainty. Textual History Outside the Closed Class of Three Witnesses. 303 Outside the closed class of sources the correct reading at Matt. 10:3, “Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus,” is found in (the mixed text type) Codex L 019 (8th century), (the independent) Codex Delta 037 (9th century), and (the mixed text type) Codex Theta 038 (9th century). It is also found in Minuscules 33 (9th century, mixed text in the Gospels), 565 (9th century, independent), 700 (11th century, independent), 157 (12th century, independent), 180 (12th century, Byzantine other than in Acts), 1071 (12th century, independent), 1243 (independent text outside of the non-Byzantine General Epistles’ text, 11th century), 579 (13th century, mixed text type), 1292 (13th century, Byzantine outside of the General Epistles), and 205 (15th century, independent in the Gospels & Revelation); as well as the Family 1 Manuscripts , which contain Minuscules 1 (12th century, independent text in the Gospels, Byzantine elsewhere), 1582 (12th century, independent Matt.-Jude), 209 (14th century, independent in the Gospels and Revelation, Byzantine elsewhere), et al . It is further found in the Syriac Pesitto (first half 5th century) and Harclean h (616) Versions, and some independent manuscripts of the Syriac Palestinian Version; as well as the Georgian Version (5th century); Slavic Version (9th century); and Ethiopic Version (Dillmann, 18th / 19th centuries). Variant 1 , “Thaddaeus,” is found in the two leading Alexandrian texts, Rome Vaticanus (4th century) and London Sinaiticus (4th century). It is also found in Minuscule 892 (9th century, mixed text type); and the Family 13 Manuscripts, which contain Minuscules 788 (11th century, independent text), 346 (12th century, independent), 543 (12th century, independent), 826 (12th century, independent), 828 (12th century, independent), 983 (12th century, independent), 13 (13th century, independent), et al . It is further found in the Egyptian Coptic Sahidic (3rd century), Middle Egyptian (3rd century), and Bohairic (3rd century) Versions. Variant 2 , “Lebbaeus,” is found in the leading representative of the Western text, Codex D 05 (5th century). Setting aside the TR’s reading which (we know on projections from the reasonable samples of von Soden’s over 90% Byzantine text K group of c. 1,000 manuscripts in Robinson and Pierpont, or von Soden’s over 85% Byzantine text I and K groups of c. 1,500 manuscripts in Hodges and Farstad,) enjoys the support of several thousand high quality Byzantine manuscripts dating from the 5th to 16th centuries, with further support from the 3rd or 4th century in Apostolic Constitutions ; like earlier neo-Alexandrian text composers, the NU Text Committee was evidently impressed by the fact that both of the two leading Alexandrian manuscripts from the 4th century followed Variant 1 . This followed the earlier Nestle’s 21st edition (1952), which has Thaddaios ( Variant 1 ) in the main text, with a footnote referring to Variant 2 , the TR, et al . Variant 1 was adopted by the NU Text et al .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Text of the Gospel of Mark: Lake Revisited
    BABELAO 3 (2014), p. 145-169 + Appendix, p. 171-289 © ABELAO (Belgium) The « Caesarean » Text of the Gospel of Mark: Lake Revisited By Didier Lafleur IRHT - Paris n the field of history and practice of New Testament textual criticism, two major stages were initiated during the last cen- tury by Kirsopp Lake. The first of these was the publication, Iin 19 02, of a survey concerning Codex 1 of the Gospels and its Allies, in the Texts and Studies series (7:3). The second stage was the pub- lication, in 1928, with Robert P. Blake and Silva New, of « The Caesarean Text of the Gospel of Mark » in the Harvard Theological Review (21:4). For the first time, the authors emphasized the exist- ence of such text on the basis of three major pieces of evidence: the Greek manuscripts, the patristic witnesses and the Oriental versions. Since then, the question of the « Caesarean » text-type has been a very disputed matter. It still remains an important tex- tual issue.1 1 This paper was first presented during the Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting 2012, Chicago, November 18. 146 D. LAFLEUR Our plan is not to discuss here about the « Caesarean » text and its subsequent developments, but to mainly focus the genesis of Lake’s publication. The survey of his preliminary works will help us to better consider, after a short account of Lake’s biobibliography, the way he followed until the 1928 « Caesarean Text of the Gospel of Mark » and which methodology he used. We will then emphasize one of the three pieces of evidence quot- ed by the authors, the evidence of the Greek manuscripts as de- scribed in their tables of variants.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 30, Number 2 Fall 2019
    Volume 30, Number 2 Fall 2019 Are the Canonical Gospels to Be Identified as a Genre of Greco-Roman Biography? The Early Church Fathers Say ‘No.’ F. DAVID FARNELL Job’s Eschatological Hope: The Implications of Job’s Redeemer for Social Justice JAMIE BISSMEYER And How Shall They Hear Without a Preacher? A Biblical Theology of Romans 9–11 GREGORY H. HARRIS A Dynamic Relationship: Christ, the Covenants, and Israel CORY M. MARSH Romans 7: An Old Covenant Struggle Seen through New Covenant Eyes JAY STREET The Reformation’s “Macedonian Call” to Africa—the Long Way Around DAVID BEAKLEY AND JOHANN ODENDAAL Implication and Application in Exposition, Part 2: Principles for Contemporary Application CARL A. HARGROVE TMS.edu Volume 30 Fall 2019 Number 2 The Master’s Seminary Journal CONTENTS Editorial ................................................................................................................. 181-83 Nathan Busenitz Are the Canonical Gospels to Be Identified as a Genre of Greco-Roman Biography? The Early Church Fathers Say ‘No.’ ............................................... 185-206 F.David Farnell Job’s Eschatological Hope: The Implications of Job’s Redeemer for Social Justice .......................................................................................................... 207-26 Jamie Bissmeyer And How Shall They Hear Without a Preacher? A Biblical Theology of Romans 9–11 .................................................................................................... 227-55 Gregory H. Harris A Dynamic Relationship:
    [Show full text]
  • The Contributions of Textual Criticism to the Interpretation of the New Testament
    Restoration Quarterly Volume 5 | Number 4 Article 2 10-1-1961 The onC tributions of Textual Criticism to the Interpretation of the New Testament Frank Pack Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/restorationquarterly Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, Christianity Commons, Comparative Methodologies and Theories Commons, History of Christianity Commons, Liturgy and Worship Commons, Missions and World Christianity Commons, Practical Theology Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Pack, Frank (1961) "The onC tributions of Textual Criticism to the Interpretation of the New Testament," Restoration Quarterly: Vol. 5 : No. 4 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/restorationquarterly/vol5/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ ACU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Restoration Quarterly by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ ACU. RESTORATION QUARTERLY CONTENTS An Introduction : Th e Task and Method of Ex egesis -Abraham J . Malh erbe ...................................................... .......... 169 Th e Contributions of Textu al Criticism t o th e Inte rpret ation of th e New Testa ment-F ran k Pack ......................................... 179 Th e Lan guage Backgro und of the New Testam ent-J . W. Rober ts 193 Th e Psych ological App roac h to Int er pret ation-Paul Sou thern .... 205 Th e J ewish Background of the New Testament-J ack P. La wis .. 209 Th e Pagan Back gro und of th e New Testam ent - Roy Bowen Wa r d ........................................................................ 216 Patri stic Int er pretat ion of th e Bible-William M.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Sense of the End of Mark Pastor Russ Reaves Immanuel Baptist Church, Greensboro, NC January 27, 2009
    Making Sense of the End of Mark Pastor Russ Reaves Immanuel Baptist Church, Greensboro, NC January 27, 2009 Anyone who has ever read the Gospel of Mark carefully has likely noticed that most Bibles contain a footnote, a marginal note, or some other device or feature to indicate that there are questions about the authenticity of Mark 16:9-20. Almost every modern English version does in some way. Following are some examples of how this is done: • A bracketed heading before verses 9-20 which states, “The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.” 1 • A footnote containing explanations similar to the following: “Some of the earliest manuscripts (or “mss.”) do not contain verses (or “vv.”) 9-20.” 2 • A footnote that reads, “Verses 9 through 20 are not found in the most ancient manuscripts, but may be considered an appendix giving additional facts.” 3 • A heading before verses 9-20 which reads, “An Ancient Appendix” or something similar. 4 • A footnote that offers a more detailed description of the situation, such as the following or similar: “Vv. (verses) 9-20 are bracketed in NU (an abbreviation for the Greek text known as Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament and United Bible Societies Greek New Testament ) as not original. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (two Greek manuscripts dating to the fourth century), although nearly all other mss. (manuscripts) of Mark contain them.” 5 • Bracketing around verses 9-20, with an explanatory notation in the footnotes stating, “Mark 16:9-20 [the portion in brackets] is contained only in later manuscripts,” or similar.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ending of the Gospel of Mark
    The ending of Mark A Textual Commentary on the Greek Gospels Vol. 2b The various endings of Mk BY WIELAND WILLKER Bremen, online published th 12 edition 2015 © all rights reserved Contents: The manuscript evidence ...................................................................................................... 3 Discussion of the external evidence ................................................................................. 4 Introductory comments in the manuscripts .................................................................... 6 Church fathers evidence ...................................................................................................... 8 Arguable evidence from the fathers .............................................................................. 13 Can a book end with ga.r? .................................................................................................... 17 Excursus: Attempts to reconstruct a lost ending ....................................................... 18 General Discussion .............................................................................................................. 22 Important literature .......................................................................................................... 24 Other various literature ................................................................................................... 25 The short ending ................................................................................................................. 27
    [Show full text]
  • Regalitatea Lui Dumnezeu N Viziunea Autorilor Psalmilor
    [Plērōma anul IX nr. 1 (2007) 5-34] IUNIA ŞI NIMFA – AVATARURILE UNOR IDENTITĂŢI FEMININE ÎN MANUSCRISELE GRECEŞTI, RESPECTIV TRADUCERILE ROMÂNEŞTI ALE NOULUI TESTAMENT prep. univ. drd. Emanuel Conţac Abstract The process of copying and translating the New Testament across the ages is sometimes bound to be affected by certain cultural predispositions of the scribes. Two passages where such tendencies can be identified are Romans 16:7 and Colossians 4:15, where two feminine names (Junia and Nympha, respectively) are understood as male names. The supposedly male identities are found in numerous manuscripts of the NT and in the vast majority of the Romanian NT translations, as shown by the present study. Introducere Odată cu ascensiunea studiilor feministe şi de gen, problematica identităţii feminine a început să facă obiectul unor cercetări intense în mai toate disciplinele umaniste sau înrudite cu acestea. Evident, nici domeniul studiilor biblice (Biblical Studies) nu a rămas neinfluenţat de noile tendinţe. Gama abordărilor este impresionantă, de la cele radicale, care denunţă vehement teologia tradiţională ca pe o emanaţie a culturii patriarhale şi misogine, propunând transformarea din temelii a establishmentului religios, 6 Emanuel Conţac până la cele care caută mai degrabă o reajustare a discursului teologic contemporan al Bisericii în lumina noilor cercetări, fără a-şi fi propus o revoluţionare a praxisului religios în sine. Dintre chestiunile puse pe tapet în perioada ultimelor decenii se detaşează cea privitoare la statutul femeilor în creştinismul timpuriu. Studii feministe recente afirmă ritos că, în zorii creştinismului, femeile slujeau alături de bărbaţi în funcţia de prezbiter, ba chiar şi de episcop.1 Alţi cercetători merg mai departe, considerând că a existat chiar şi o femeie printre apostoli – Iunia, menţionată în Epistola apostolului Pavel către Romani, 16:7.
    [Show full text]
  • Pericope Adulterae 1/20
    András Handl: Tertullianus on the Pericope Adulterae 1/20 TERTULLIANUS ON THE PERICOPE ADULTERAE (JOHN 7,53–8,11) Abstract Although Terullianus is deeply engaged in discussions on Christian marriage, adultery, and on the remission of (grave) sins, he never addressed the story of the woman caught in adultery known today from the Gospel of John. This essay argues that his silence cannot be explained by suppression because of the explosive nature of the story in relation to penitential discipline and to his own views and arguments. Rather, it proposes that the pericope adulterae was unknown in Carthage at his time. 1. Introduction The story of the woman caught in adultery in the Gospel of John (7,53–8,11) represents one of the most mysterious New Testament passages. Omitted in early manuscripts, the circulation and dissemination of the pericope adulterae (henceforth the PA) is controversially discussed. Already C. R. Gregory (1846–1917) claimed that the PA had been “very often read, and especially at a very early time.”1 H. Riesenfeld (1913–2008) assessed that the Latin translation of the passage ”appears sporadically before the Vulgate and then in the entire Vulgate tradition.”2 This judgement has been criticised by T. O'Loughlin. Based on the number of extant Vetus Latina fragments, he came to the conclusion that the PA “was more likely [included] than not to have been present [in the Vetus Latina] prior to the dominance of the Vulgate.”3 According to J. W. Knust, “the pericope was present only in a few copies of John in the early second century―which seems to be a likely conclusion given the patristic and manuscript evidence.”4 In a statement―often considered as the actual communis opinio―, B.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and Their Texts
    AN INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS AND THEIR TEXTS This is the first major English-language introduction to the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament to appear for over forty years. An essential handbook for scholars and students, it provides a thorough grounding in the study and editing of the New Testament text combined with an emphasis on dramatic current developments in the field. Covering ancient sources in Greek, Syriac, Latin and Coptic, it * describes the manuscripts and other ancient textual evidence, and the tools needed to study them * deals with textual criticism and textual editing, describing modern approaches and techniques, with guidance on the use of editions * introduces the witnesses and textual study of each of the main sections of the New Testament, discussing typical variants and their significance. A companion website with full-colour images provides generous amounts of illustrative material, bringing the subject alive for the reader. d. c. parker is Edward Cadbury Professor of Theology in the Department of Theology and Religion and a Director of the Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing, University of Birmingham. His publications include The Living Text of the Gospels (1997) and Codex Bezae: an Early Christian Manuscript and its Text (1992). AN INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS AND THEIR TEXTS D. C. PARKER University of Birmingham CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521895538 © D.
    [Show full text]
  • Kilpatrick' Greek New Testament Edition of 1958
    Early Readers, Scholars and Editors of the New Testament Texts and Studies 11 Series Editor H. A. G. Houghton Editorial Board Jeff W. Childers Christina M. Kreinecker Alison G. Salvesen Peter J. Williams Text and Studies is a series of monographs devoted to the study of Biblical and Patristic texts. Maintaining the highest scholarly standards, the series includes critical editions, studies of primary sources, and analyses of textual traditions. Early Readers, Scholars and Editors of the New Testament Papers from the Eighth Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament Edited by H. A. G. Houghton 2014 Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2014 by Gorgias Press LLC All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2014 ܚ ISBN 978-1-4632-0411-2 ISSN 1935-6927 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament (8th : 2013 : University of Birmingham) Early readers, scholars, and editors of the New Testament : papers from the Eighth Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament / edited by H.A.G. Houghton. pages cm. -- (Texts and studies, ISSN 1935-6927 ; 11) Proceedings of the Eighth Birmingham Colloquium on the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, held in the Orchard Learning Resource Centre at the University of Birmingham, March 4-6, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • TEXT-TYPES? Characteristics / Readings, Unique to Their Location, Resulting in Localized Text-Types Or Textual Families
    As individual New Testament books were received and circulated in the early Christian church, various copies were made and deployed NEW TESTAMENT throughout the ancient world. As manuscripts were circulated within particular geographical regions they began to take on particular TEXT-TYPES? characteristics / readings, unique to their location, resulting in localized text-types or textual families. The Alexandrian text-type is the form of The Western text-type is the form of the New Testament text witness in ALEXANDRIAN Greek New Testament that predominates WESTERN the Old Latin and Peshitta translations from the Greek, and also in in the earliest surviving documents, as well quotations from the 2nd and 3rd century Christian writers, including as the text-type used in Egyptian Coptic Cyprian, Tertullian, and Irenaeus. Alexandrian Codex Sinaiticus manuscripts. manuscripts are is considered to characteristic by be Western in its majuscule or the first eight uncial texts. Above chapters of is John 1:1 in Codex John’s Gospel Only one Greek uncial manuscript is considered to transmit a Western text The two oldest Sinaiticus in its for the four Gospels and the Book of Acts, the fifth century Codex Bezae; the and closest to EARLIER upper case sixth century Codex Clarmontanus is considered to transmit a western text complete copies majuscule texts for Paul’s letters and is followed by two ninth century uncials: F and G. of the New א Codex Sinaiticus - 01 330-360 AD Other early manuscripts of note Testament, are P66 and P75. Codex Sinaiticus Many, if not most, textual critics today believe that and Codex there were two major early text-types that can be Vaticanus,* are ascertained, the Alexandrian and Western.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Textuai History of Hebrews
    Mapping the Textuai History of Hebrews Timothy Jolm FINNEY Abstract. 'Ille Illultivariate technique of c1assical scaling is applied to the textual tradition of the New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews. TIIe resultant maps ma)' he interprcted as representÎng the tex tuaI developmcnt of the Epistle in lime, and, perhaps, space. TIle data matrices trom which the maps arc produced have a high inherent dimensionality, 50 the mars arc limited in their ability to convey the textual situation sufficiently. Comparison with a set of critical principles suggcsts that the lexIs of P46 and Codex Vaticanlls are the Illost primitive among the ex tant witnesses. Résumé. La technique ,multivariée de l'analyse hiérarchique classique est appliquée à la tradition textuelle de l'Epître aux Hébreux du Nouveau Testament. Les graphiques qui en découlent peuvent être considérées comme représentant le développement textuel de l'Épître dans le temps ct, peut~être, l'espace. Les matrices de données ayant scrvi à produire ces graphiques présentent une dimensionalité inhérente élevée, ce qui limite leur capacité à exprimcr de façon fiable la situation textuelle. Une comparaison à un ensemble de principes critiques permet dc penser que les textes de P46 et du Codex lfalicalills sont les plus anciens. Keyword.s: Classical scaling, multivariate l'I-lots·c1és : Analyse hiérarchique classique, analysis, textual criticism, Epistle ta the analyse multivariée, critique textuelle, Épître Hebrews, New Testament. aux hébreux, Nouveau Testament. 1. Introduction 111e New Testament is supported by a rich and diverse textual tradi­ tion. Besides thousands of extant manuseripts in its original Greek lan­ guage, there are tens of thousands of other witnesses induding quotations ~ Daptist TIleological College of Western Australia; 20, Hayman Road; Dentley, \VA 6102; Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Manuscript 2193 and Its Text of the Gospel According to John
    Concordia Seminary - Saint Louis Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary Master of Sacred Theology Thesis Concordia Seminary Scholarship 5-1-2013 Manuscript 2193 and its Text of the Gospel According to John Timothy Koch Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.csl.edu/stm Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Koch, Timothy, "Manuscript 2193 and its Text of the Gospel According to John" (2013). Master of Sacred Theology Thesis. 27. https://scholar.csl.edu/stm/27 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Concordia Seminary Scholarship at Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master of Sacred Theology Thesis by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © 2013 by Timothy A. Koch. All rights reserved. CONTENTS ILLUSTRATIONS v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi ABSTRACT vii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. MANUSCRIPT 2193 7 Description of the Manuscript 7 Abbreviations and Contractions 8 Ligatures 11 Spacing 12 Classification of 2193's Minuscule Script 12 Nomina Sacra 24 Punctuation 27 The Corrector(s) 30 3. FAMILY 1 36 Family 1 introduction 36 Kirsopp Lake and the Beginnings of the Family 1 Label 37 Current Status of Disparities of Family 1 Members 42 Inherent Problems with Family 1 Label: A Case Study of Manuscript 565 46 Manuscript 2193 and Family 1 51 4. THE TEXT OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN IN MANUSCRIPT 2193 53 Grouping manuscripts based on their texts 53 iii Family 1 Readings 56 Singular Readings 68 Other Textual Features 69 5.
    [Show full text]