Noah Snyder

1,072 reputation

129

bio	website	sbseminar.wordpress.com
	location	New York, NY
	age	33
visits	member for	11 months
	seen	7 hours ago
stats	profile views	4

I'm an assistant professor in mathematics at Indiana and an early adopter of Math Overflow. I was the first user at mathematics.SE.

	1,072 reputation	bio	website	sbseminar.wordpress.com	visits	member for	11 months
129 badges		location	New York, NY		seen	7 hours ago

summary answers questions tags badges favorites bounties reputation activity

49 Comments

suggestions reviews revisions comments badges posts accepts all

Feb 28	comment	Was the word ἐπιούσιον used prior to the Lord's prayer? What does it mean? It's perhaps worth noting that if you believe (as the overwhelming majority of scholars do) that Matthew and Luke were originally written in Greek, it is nonetheless very plausible that the Lord's prayer itself is based on an Aramaic original. From this point of view the Peshitta itself isn't so interesting, but trying to reconstruct the word that would have been used in the Aramaic vorlage would still be relevant.
Feb 18	comment	Contextually, which English translation/ Greek text seems more probable in Rev. 5:10? At the very least I'd need to have some idea of the theory under which you're doubting the manuscript evidence. For example, I could understand the question "Under the theory that all manuscripts copied in Egypt were corrupted by gnostic scribes, would the remaining evidence be enough to conclude which reading is correct."
Feb 18	comment	Contextually, which English translation/ Greek text seems more probable in Rev. 5:10? I did not VTC, but I don't think I understand what the question is here. It seems to me that what you're asking is: "Ignoring the conclusive evidence that X is true and Y is false, would the remaining ambiguous evidence suggest that X is true or Y?" I'm honestly not sure what a question of that form means, and so I could certainly understand why someone would think it was not a real question.
Feb 18	comment	Contextually, which English translation/ Greek text seems more probable in Rev. 5:10? My point was just that neither Nestle-Aland nor the Textus Receptus is a translation.
Feb 18	comment	Contextually, which English translation/ Greek text seems more probable in Rev. 5:10? If I understand your question correctly, the title is misphrased. You mean which "reading" (that is, which version of the Greek text) and not which "translation" (that is, translation from the original Greek into some other language like English), right?
Feb 14	comment	What portions of the New Testament are purported to have originally been written in Aramaic? This isn't Q theory, it's more commonly a part of the Augustinian Hypothesis (which emphasizes patristic testimony over internal evidence) than the 2 source hypothesis.
Feb 11	comment	How is literary dependence or relationship established? @swasheck: Added an attempt at an answer to that. Probably a philosopher of science (especially of social science) would be a better person to ask to get the distinctions right though.
Feb 11	comment	How is literary dependence or relationship established? @swasheck: Fair enough, then you'll have to wait for someone more expert than me. My knowledge is only at the beginner level.
Feb 7	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? @FraserOrr: My understanding is that it's very rare for scholars who believe in theopneustos to think that this belief implies that the synoptics are independent. At any rate, I would be very interested to hear examples of the "serious scholars" you're mentioning over at the other question.
Feb 6	comment	Literary independence of the synoptics I'm having trouble figuring out how to clarify this rigorously. For example, I would count Matthew having memorized Mark prior to writing his gospel as literary dependence, even if he learned it orally from someone who had read it and memorized it.
Feb 6	comment	Literary independence of the synoptics I would be interested in examples of people who think that they share common oral tradition pre-dating the written gospels, but that none of the authors had read (or heard recited) any of the other gospels.
Feb 6	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? I've posted a question about this. hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/4099/…
Feb 6	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? In particular, I'd be very surprised to find conservative scholars who think Luke was written in isolation from the other gospels, in light of Luke 1:1-3.
Feb 6	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? @FraserOrr: (You meant to say Matthew and Luke share a source called Q, not Matthew and Mark. As you say, plenty of scholars don't think Q existed. I did not mean to imply that disagreeing with Q was a fringe viewpoint, only that saying the synoptics were "written in isolation" is very rare among scholars (evangelical or not).)
Feb 6	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? @FraserOrr: Literary dependence between the synoptics is in a very different category historically than things like Q or JEDP. The Augustinian hypothesis (Mark used Matthew, Luke used Matthew and Mark) goes back to the 5th century and is the traditional view of the church, while JEDP or Q are modern ideas coming out of higher criticism.
Feb 6	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? You're free to believe what you want, but you should be aware that your opinion is incredibly uncommon among Christian scholars going back at least to St. Augustine.
Feb 6	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? @Mawia: I just mean that according to most scholars, the author of Matthew used a written copy of Mark as the source for about half of the material of his gospel. (According to a minority of scholars, the copying goes the other way.) Thus the "original" of half of the material in Matthew is Mark. I mentioned this example, because it's less controversial than say John 21 or Luke 1-2 being later additions to previously existing works. At any rate, this is getting very far afield from the original question.
Feb 5	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? To give another example of the trickiness of "original", you might say the original version of Matthew is the Gospel of Mark!
Feb 4	comment	How authentic is Codex Sinaiticus? I'm a little confused about what your question is. I would find it easier to answer if you made your question more precise.
Jan 16	comment	Is the ending of the Gospel of Mark (16:9-20) original? Added some references, and two other arguments (which are pretty closely related to the other ones).