Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

23

Professor Bart D. Ehrman's Curriculum Vitae reveals an academic with impeccable credentials. Perhaps the most important line is: Ph.D. Princeton Theological Seminary (magna cum laude), 1985 His doctoral adviser was none other than Bruce Metzger, who wrote the book on textual criticism of the New Testament. Ehrman doesn't simply ride on the coattails ...


23

Your question doesn't break it down this way, but there are really three separate issues at stake here. What does the Gospel of Barnabas claim about Christ? The most significant claim relevant to Christianity is that Christ wasn't crucified. Instead, according to the Gospel of Barnabas, Judas took his place. Obviously if this were to be verified as a true ...


16

To answer your first question, we should not simply accept Sinaiticus as the source of the truth for the New Testament. It has great weight in debates from its age, but age is not the final arbiter in textual considerations. Codex Sinaiticus was made in the 4th century on parchment using capital letters (a manuscript in all capitals is called an "uncial"). ...


13

My understanding is that a strong majority of scholars (including conservative scholars) take the position that the long ending of Mark was not in the original and was not written by the same author as the rest of the text, but nonetheless was added very early on (probably in the early 2nd century). However, the evidence is not as overwhelming as for the ...


12

The latest argument in Evangelical theological circles is that we should not consider this part of the original gospel. The ESV Study Bible is a Bible published in the last few years and all of the scholarship and notes comes from a wide swath of evangelical theologians and academics. Its study note on this passage provides a good summary of this view: ...


12

This is a textual issue. That is, some manuscripts have the words and fasting while others don’t. The NA28 includes the text similar to the GNT you quote: . . . τοῦτο τὸ γένος ἐν οὐδενὶ δύναται ἐξελθεῖν εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ (NA28) . . . this kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer (ESV) The apparatus notes the variant you ask about (the ...


11

Probably for continuity. The translation philosophy of the NKJV version was to essentially follow the original King James Version but update the language. They did realize that there was textual discrepencies. That particular passage included words found in later Greek editions of the text but not in earlier editions. Regarding textual discrepancies of ...


11

The manuscripts that omit "in Ephesus" do not have a blank line. That is actually just a theory at this point with no manuscript evidence as far as I know. The words just run together, as you say. If you want to know what this looks like, you can look at Codex Sinaiticus (4th century) for this. When Sinaiticus was originally copied, it was missing εν εφεσῳ. ...


9

This is a case where the argument for inauthenticity is quite clear. The Comma Johanneum does not appear in any ancient Greek sources (1 John, like all the other books of the New Testament, was written originally in Greek). The earliest Greek version of 1 John with the Comma Johanneum is from 1516! The extra line was added to some Latin manuscripts ...


9

The existing answer already gives the essentials. This variation in reading Revelation 22:14 persists across quite a number of modern English translations. I thought it might help to have a bit of explanation, too, especially if readers have some sense of the textual landscape for the NT. Not for nothing does the introduction to the Nestle-Aland edition ...


9

This is not a question of textual criticism, nor is there any reason to reject the authenticity of Mark 7:19. It is entirely a question of interpreting the text. Let us look at the oldest versions: The Greek original has: οτι ουκ εισπορευεται αυτου εις την καρδιαν αλλ εις την κοιλιαν και εις τον αφεδρωνα εκπορευεται καθαριζων παντα τα βρωματα The ...


9

There are no important textual variations here: all our manuscripts include this parenthetical. There's no manuscript evidence whatsoever that this is a later insertion. (See this list of textual variants as well as the lack of any variants listed at the NET bible.) Thus we can be completely certain that the head of the manuscript tradition (that is the ...


9

A Plausible Majority Text Argument Susan's answer has correctly given the direct answer to your question when she states: This is a textual issue. That is, some manuscripts have the words and fasting while others don’t. That is the simple fact. Which manuscript tradition the particular translation in question is following determines the omission or ...


8

First, my understanding of "lower" is that it is not in honor, or esteem, but in terms of layers of the critical methods. Text criticism is an attempt to deal with the actual text itself and as such, it is at a lower level (subterranean, perhaps?) of examination. It always confused me, but that's how I reconciled that in my head. I do not believe that it is ...


8

He is not respected by most conservatives when he slips into theology. Textual criticism, he is very good and knows what he is doing. However, I find him sloppy in his work if it pushes his agenda. What's worse is that he knows how to do the work, but since his faith lapsed, he misapplies and misquotes the rules of determining historicity. For example, ...


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 ...


8

According to the NET Translator's notes, The vast majority of witnesses have αὐτούς (autous, “them”) here, while the Textus Receptus reads ἡμᾶς (Jhmas, “us”) with insignificant support (pc gig vgcl sa Prim Bea). There is no question that the original text read αὐτούς here.... The textual problem here between the present tense βασιλεύουσιν ...


8

I know you asked for contextual evidence and I hope to get there. However, when it comes to these sorts of things, contextual (which is part of internal) evidence is really only one of the factors that goes into these sorts of things. overview of internal and external evidence The UBS (4th ed.) also has αὐτοὺς (which is unsurprising given the overlap ...


8

It is true that all Jewish prayerbooks and scriptural resources exclude a "nun" line in Psalm 145. It is also true that the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Bible read by Greek-speaking Jews and Christians, the Peshitta – the translation used by the Syrian church, and one of the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Psalms texts, presumably used by members of the ...


8

Another addendum to Susan's fine answer and ScottS's alternative account. All manuscripts are not the same, which is why the text critic's job is not simply that of counting noses. We have two possible scenarios an original shorter reading, which was subsequently expanded in transmission by the addition of "+ and fasting" after "prayer"; an original ...


7

The NET Bible textual criticism note is helpful here: The MT has simply “and Cain said to Abel his brother,” omitting Cain’s words to Abel. It is possible that the elliptical text is original. Perhaps the author uses the technique of aposiopesis, “a sudden silence” to create tension. In the midst of the story the narrator suddenly rushes ahead to what ...


7

ψηφίζω (Strongs G5585) - to count with pebbles, to compute, calculate, reckon; to give one's vote by casting a pebble into the urn; to decide by voting. This is the same word used in Luke 14:28 in which the builder of a tower will "count the cost" to ensure he has enough to complete it. As for its usage in this passage, J. Hampton Keathley, III, the author ...


7

I am going to attempt to walk through the major literature in this discussion, which will be a lot of back and forth. I have linked to all the major works referenced, however not all of the articles and books are freely available online (some must be purchased). Both Gordon D. Fee and Philip B. Payne are notable scholars who believe that 1 Corinthians ...


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 ...


7

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 ...


7

A reinked manuscript is indeed a manuscript where a later scribe wrote over the letters. The scribe might be trying to preserve a text that otherwise would be lost or might be making "corrections." Reinking a manuscript makes paleographic analysis very difficult because the original handwriting is overwritten. Reinking also tends to obscure accent marks and ...


7

The LXX and MT texts of Jeremiah are substantially different. The LXX is substantially shorter (around an eighth shorter) and the order of some of the text is different. This is much more substantial than most divergences between the LXX and MT. In general, there are two main ways in which the MT and LXX can differ: the Hebrew text that the LXX ...


7

We cannot read NT passages into the Old Testament to explain difficulties - each passage must be understood in its own context. Otherwise I would read the second half of 2 Pet 3:8 into Genesis and say that Methuselah was almost a day old when he died. Instead, I'll give an OT example with similar wording to try to understand the meaning behind the Hebrew ...


7

Ecclesiastes 7:27 unusually records: "says Qohelet" (אָמְרָה קֹהֶלֶת = ʾāmĕrâ qōhelet), notable for more than one reason. The problem here is the gender of the verb (which is, in the MT, 3rd feminine singular). The title "Qohelet", usually translated (when it is translated) as "the Preacher" or the like, only occurs in Eccl. 1:1, 2, 12; 7:27; 12:8, 9, 10 - ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible