Hot answers tagged source-criticism
11
None of these are called "the ten commandments" in the text, though Moshe, in Deut 4:13 and Deut 10:4, does refer to the "ten words" and probably means Exodus 20. (Words -- d'varim -- rather than commandments -- mitzvot.)
The text does not ever assert that there are only ten commandments that matter. There are many lists (of length greater than 10) of ...
8
A detailed study on this issue by Daniel B. Wallace of the Evangelical Theological Society discusses five possibilities:
Text-Critical: The text as it stands is incorrect and needs to be emended.
Dominical: Jesus himself made a mistake or was intentionally midrashic (i.e., he embellished the OT story to make his point).
Source-critical: Mark’s source ...
8
Fraser Orr's answer is excellent and I only hope to supplement his excellent answer with a few thoughts regarding "reliability."
When asking a question like this, it's important to state your purpose. Why are you asking this question? The logic is such that they have reliable uses and applications within their own domains and we need to know the domain in ...
8
There are plenty of web sites that will give you comparatives, however, my broad take on the subject is that the LXX is not generally speaking considered more authoritative than any Hebrew text. The translators were not especially careful (though certainly not sloppy.) The amount of textual variants in the Hebrew text are MUCH smaller than in the Greek, for ...
7
I accessed "The Wisdom of Ben Sira: portions of the Book Ecclesiasticus from Hebrew manuscripts in the Cairo Genizah collection," edited by S. Schechter and C. Taylor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899. It is accessible here.
Fortunately, this book did have verse 3:17 in it, which follows:
.בני בעשרך התהלך בענוה ותאהב מנותן מתנות
בני ...
7
[JPS translation and verse numbering throughout, unless otherwise noted]
Joel is a short book (just three or four chapters depending on how their broken up), rich with themes of eschatology, repentance, redemption and a very sardonic description of famine:
Awake, ye drunkards, and weep, and wail, all ye drinkers of wine,
because of the sweet wine, for ...
7
user959 has a good answer which tells me that I should probably spend more time reading the translation committee's commentary. Having said that, textual criticism is quite interesting.
While using text criticism, we look at two primary areas of evidence to support a reading: external evidence and internal evidence. With external evidence we evaluate the ...
7
Check Tommy Wasserman's new(ish) critical edition of the text with commentary, it is more recent than NA28 and is certainly more complete with regard to manuscript evidence. His comments will be more detailed than those in UBS, though the comments there are often quite good. It should address the issue quite nicely. I don't have it on hand right now or I ...
6
According to Dr. Constantinou many of the books were separated when they were translated into Greek because the addition of vowels made individual scrolls too ponderous. Since Bibles in English tend to follow the Septuagint order even though they follow the Masoretic texts, they remain split.
I went back and found the place where she discusses this: here. ...
6
In response to your question:
I am curious if any scholars have argued that either [ὁ] κύριος ([the] Lord) or ὁ θεός (the God) are the preferred reading of this passage, [...]
Yes.
I have treated Jude 5 (and the whole book) extensively in my monograph on Jude. The book is available here.
You might find this blogpost is a helpful summary of my ...
5
I think "which is more reliable" is too imprecise a question. There are situations where the Dead Sea scrolls agree with the MT against LXX and vice-versa, and in some cases there's just no way to know which version is older. One more precise question is how often are the Qumran manuscripts close to MT and how often are they close to LXX. Wikipedia says ...
5
It's hard (impossible?) to be sure, because there are no temporal anchors in the text itself. The Wikipedia article, citing Leslie Allen (The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah & Micah), outlines four scholar-supported options based on textual analysis:
9th century BCE
c. 670-587 BCE, contemporary with Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Habakkuk
c 520-500 BCE, ...
5
It is often believed that the author of the second book references the first book. This is based on both using otherwise rare words (such as "multiply" in Jude 2 being used in 1 Peter 1:2 and 2 Peter 1:2) and themes ("our common salvation" in Jude 3 and "a faith of the same kind as ours" in 2 Peter 1:2). Whether Jude quotes 2 Peter or 2 Peter uses content ...
4
The best evidence against John the beloved disciple as the sole author is found in John 21:20-24, particularly verse 24:
This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. [emphasis mine]
A straightforward reading of this suggests that the beloved disciple had ...
4
For context, the Gileadites were the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh who chose to occupy the land on the opposite side of the Jordan from the rest of Israel. This region was called Gilead. The Ephraimites had crossed the Jordan in order to confront the Gileadites, but were defeated by their fellow Israelites. The passage in question ...
4
Mark 13 is not critical to dating this gospel, but can help corroborate external evidence, and perhaps help improve our precision in dating it.
External Evidence
The earliest external evidence we have, from a second century bishop named Papias, says Mark was based on Peter's preaching:
Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately ...
3
Firstly, I believe in the inerrancy of God's Word, but I don't believe it is always helpful to bend over backwards making things 'fit' - sometimes we have to just accept that we don't have the knowledge to do so (and in those cases I'd say the things that have been revealed are the things that matter - and also go along with jrdioko's quote against the ...
3
First, I think it obvious that Jonah did not put this prayer to paper inside the leviathan, but wrote these words sometime later. Second, it isn't obvious who the author of the book itself is. Perhaps Jonah himself wrote it, but we really don't know. Third, it's unavoidable to notice that the book includes details that smack of hyperbole1:
Jonah ...
3
The passage in question is Philippians 2:5-11 (NET Bible):
You should have the same attitude toward one another that Christ Jesus had,
who though he existed in the form of God
did not regard equality with God
as something to be grasped,
but emptied himself
by taking on the form of a slave,
by looking like other men,
and by sharing in human nature.
He ...
3
The Hittite treaties changed shape over time. Archeology has uncovered several examples of sometimes radical differences from one century to the next. The 10 Commandments are shaped like a Suzerainty Covenant, so is the book of Deuteronomy. When these forms are laid out next to the 10 Commandments or Dt, they both conform to the treaties from 1,200-1,500 ...
2
The name was probably "Nevel", meaning "Harp". He was apparently a loyalist to the House of Saul living in Judah, which shows you how successful Saul was in maintain discipline in the kingdom, but which did not endear him to the author of I Samuel, who clearly sides with David and sees Nevel as a traitor to the tribe of Judah and calls him Naval. A Saul ...
2
Jesus has said many times that in following Him, we will endure persecution from the world. That's what He is saying here.
If a person should forsake these things (for His sake and the Gospel's), he will receive a hundred times as much in the family of God; in this time (this current age, which brings persecution, possibly from the people we forsake), and ...
2
@jrdioko lists five possibilities in his answer. Others have made the case for this not being an error. I'll consider the other options. If "in the time of Abiathar the high priest" is intended to mean "while Abiathar was high priest," who introduced the error?
But first, my assumptions. I believe the Bible is infallible but not inerrant. That is, God chose ...
2
This question is hotly debated, and there's no real consensus. There's a very recent monograph on exactly this topic, Goodacre's "Thomas and the gospels". He argues strongly that Thomas is dependent on Matthew and Luke. According to Goodacre in an interview with his publisher, scholars are divided roughly 50/50 on whether Thomas is early and independent ...
1
The word "Abiathar" in the text may go all the way back to Jesus and it's entirely possible he misspoke.
As Bruce Alderman's answer ably points out, we can never know the exact words that Jesus spoke as there were no recording devices at the time. Therefore, we must rely on the people who heard Jesus' words to remember them until they could be recorded ...
1
In literal frameworks, the rule of unity says that apparent contradictions should each be accepted as true, with the confidence that the contradiction will be resolved in a higher unity.
Application of this rule gives us the Trinity in the face of the apparent contradiction that there is only one God, but the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are each God.
A ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
