[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #680
b-greek-digest Monday, 24 April 1995 Volume 01 : Number 680
In this issue:
Re: UBS4 & NA27
Re: UBS4 & NA27
Re: Software for learning Greek.
1 Cor 15:29
Aland(s) in German and English
Putting NA25 in your pocket
Re: N27 and UBS editions
Re: UBS4 & NA27
Re: 1 Tim 2:12, AUTHENTEIN
Re: UBS4 & NA27
Re: UBS4 & NA27
Re: UBS4 & NA27 (Punctuation)
Re: Memorisation of Principal Parts
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 95 23:02:41 PDT
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
Thanks for the translation Jeff of Aland's statement. Seeing it in German
reminded me of a college class in OT theology I took. The prof started out
one class session by reading a passage in German that he thought summarized
something really well. Since none of us were fluent at all in German (I didn't
know any), we all just looked at each other like "That was unique; wonder what
it meant.". Does anyoone know if this book by Aland has been translated into
German? The subject interests me and I'm looking for something that exists in
German and has been translated, related to biblical studies, to use for
translation practice over the Summer. I need something with an English
translation so I can check my work. THnaks.
Ken Litwak
Emeryville, CA
------------------------------
From: Kenneth Litwak <kenneth@sybase.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 95 23:12:17 PDT
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
While the NA27 apparatus is certainly better, I think an important
question can be raised at this point. Are all the variants listed in
the NA27 really that important, as opposed to the significant variants
listed in UBS4? I don't want to sound like I'm oversimplifying, but is
it really important to know of variansts supported by say, jsut Tertullian and W
to use a hypothetical example? I don't think so. I wouldn't take that
variant seriously because it lacks attestaion and it would not
affect my exegesis in the least to know that there are some virtually
impossible testual variants on a given passage. I know that's a subjective
judgement, but I've learned to pay attention when p46, 33 81 and A agree
agaisnt B, but not when only the second hand of D plus Armenian MSS
support a reading. Some fo that stuff strikes me more as being along the
lines of the detailed electronic info given when you buy computer accessories.
I don't know what all the Underwiters Lab stuff means and it doesn't really
affect me anyway in a direct way. I think the UBS4 is adequate for
exegesis as a general rule, though if there is an interesting variant,
I'd go to the NA27 to get further info. Is that a reasonable approach or
am I ovesimplifying too much?
Ken Litwak
Emeryville, CA
------------------------------
From: BOEHMISCH FRANZ <KLBOEH01@fsuni.rz.uni-passau.de>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 15:30:27 MEZ-1MESZ
Subject: Re: Software for learning Greek.
Dear collegues,
I have collected Internet-resources during the last month
concerning online Bible and Bible languages and electronic
products in Bible interpretation generally.
Important resources are:
The Bible Software FAQ (including Hebrew and Greek cbl-
programs)
The Georgetown Catalogue of Computer Based Electronic
Texts.
The service in the UK "Software for Theologians"
and a list of important articles from a databank at
Innsbruck, Austria concerning computerbased working with
the bible.
You can find this all at the WWW-Site:
http://www.uni-passau.de/ktf/bibelwissenschaft.html
at the University of Passau (Germany).
Please do inform me about materials You find and I do not
know.
Sincerely, Franz
- --
Franz Boehmisch, Bible Scholar, klboeh01@fsuni.rz.uni-passau.de
University of Passau, Michaeligasse 13, D-94032 Passau, Germany
Kath.-Theol. Hochschule, Bethlehemstr. 20, A-4020 Linz, Austria
Subjects: Ben-Sira, history of exegesis (Nicolaus de Lyra), Syriac.
http://www.uni-passau.de/ktf/mitarbeiter/boehmisch.html
------------------------------
From: Rod Decker <rod.j.decker@uwrf.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 09:17:01 -0500
Subject: 1 Cor 15:29
Vincent Broman wrote:
>rod.j.decker@uwrf.edu wrote, partly quoting Fee:
>> It is never found in any other church in the
>> NT, in the early history of the church, "nor in any orthodox Christian
>> community in the centuries that immediately followed; nor are there
>> parallels or precedents in pagan religion."
>
>This is a bit overstated. While Paul's views on the practice are unknown,
...
>The Marcionites practiced some kind of vicarious baptism of a living
...
Since these are Fee's comments, I don't have to defend them all, but
perhaps the difference is in how one defines "orthodox"?
>
>About no precedents or parallels...
>Religious ceremonies done for the living in behalf of the dead are
>a commonplace, from Egyptian (and other) burial rites, to Japanese
...
I suspect Fee's intention was that there were no pagan parallels
illustrating _baptism_ for the dead, or at least in practices known in
first-century Corinth. Parallels from such a wide diversity of other
sources as you cite are not particularly relevant to discussing what the
Corinthians understood. Those closest offered (Egyptian) are considerably
different and have a purpose that seems quite far removed from 1 Cor. 15.
>
>rod.j.decker@uwrf.edu wrote
>> We simply do not know to what it was that Paul refers.
>> ...My conclusion is that whatever this baptism was, it is not a practice that
>> God intended or instituted.
>
>Bit of a non-sequitur, eh?
Not at all--unless one is prepared to argue that God intended or instituted
a practice to be followed by the church but was so inept that he couldn't
make it clear what was to be done, how it was to be done, or why it was to
be done.
Rod
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rodney J. Decker Calvary Theological Seminary
Asst. Prof./NT 15800 Calvary Rd.
Kansas City, Missouri 64147
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: Edward Hobbs <EHOBBS@wellesley.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 15:12:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Aland(s) in German and English
In response to Ken Litwak's inquiry about whether the Aland 1969 Report exists
in English translation:
These Reports by Aland for the Institute are sent out every year
(at least I receive one every year), but so far as I know are never put into
English in any official way.
But what you want actually exists. The quite basic volume by
both Alands (Kurt and wife Barbara), _The Text of the New Testament_,
exists in the original German (obviously!), and also (both editions,
no less -- but why not use the 2nd?) in a fine English translation
by my old roommate, Erroll F. W. Rhodes. Kurt Aland was very happy with this
translation, as he was of that of his Einfuehrung to the Nestle edition,
also by Erroll. (He omits the "W." initial, but I recall it clearly;
Metzger always refers to him as "E. G. Rhodes"--a sign of other slips as
well?) Erroll is also a textual critic, which Aland considered a great
virtue in his translator.
Edward Hobbs
------------------------------
From: Edward Hobbs <EHOBBS@wellesley.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 15:32:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Putting NA25 in your pocket
Of course David Moore is right, that my comment about using NA25 or UBS1
instead of the NA27 was hyperbole (as was my remark about the TR coming
back and WH being burned) -- but primarily because it is impractical.
Of course I use, and my students use, NA27 now -- not only is its
apparatus improved through new collations, but there isn't really any
alternative. Students cannot buy the NA25 or earlier, nor the UBS1;
they are long out of print. So they must buy what is available.
But the real damage is that students (and teachers as well)
tend to read what is in the text as THE "Gospel" text (that isn't even
a pun, is it?), and the rest as "variants". The text of NA27 and UBS4
is a mass of variants, also; but what is "in the text" IS the text for
most. And the amount of textual criticism really grasped by most people
in the NT guild is insufficient to interpret the Apparatus of NA27
with any kind of authority. And there is little doubt that Aland's
occasional references to this new text (NA26/UBS3) as the "Standard Text"
are in fact the way the majority of users look at it.
Alas! But David Moore is right; there isn't really any way
to do otherwise than use what they print. And the Apparatus IS better.
Edward Hobbs
------------------------------
From: WINBROW@aol.com
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 15:35:09 -0400
Subject: Re: N27 and UBS editions
On the 23rd David Moore wrote,
>those which are treated (variants in the UBS) are normally dealt with more
in depth than in the Nestle editions.<
When you learn to use the lists of major witnesses in the introduction and
the witnesses which contain the reading where the variant is in the N-A26 or
27 you can compile as large number of witnesses for each variant as is found
in the UBS text. It usually takes a little longer until you memorize the
major witnesses lists for various parts of the NT, but the information in the
N-A is more comprehensive than most students realize.
Carlton Winbery
------------------------------
From: Gary Meadors <gmeadors@epix.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 15:41:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
On Fri, 21 Apr 1995, Edgar M. Krentz wrote:
>
> Teubneriana texts. As far as the punctuation goes, one should take the
> punctuation of all editions with a grain of salt, since they are all
> editorial decisions, whether by early scribes or modern editors.
>
True, but the UBS inclusion of punctuation variations provides numerous
ILLUSTRATIONS of how editorial interpretive perception affects the
presentation of texts, often to an unsuspecting audience.
Beginning students of interpretation can benefit by having this pointed
out to them. Thus, there is some value in retaining it in a manual GNT
for classroom purposes.
------------------------------
From: Gary Meadors <gmeadors@epix.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 15:54:58 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 1 Tim 2:12, AUTHENTEIN
In addition to the articles by Knight (NTS 30 [1984]:143-157); Kroeger
(RefJour 29 [1979]:12-15); Moo (TrinJour NS1, 2 [1980, 1981]:62-83,
198-222); Payne (TrinJour NS2 [1981]:169-197)...and a host of others,
Cf. Wilshire (NTS 34 [1988]:120-134; and EvanQuar 65 [1993]:43-55)
Sharon Gritz, _Paul, Women Teachers, and The Mother Goddess at
Ephesus: A Study of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 in Light of the Religious and
Cultural Milieu of the First Century_ (UPA, 1991).
Saucy (JETS 37 [1994]:79-97).
Scholer "1 Timothy 2:9-15 & The Place of Women in the Church's
Ministry", in Mickelsen's _Women, Authority & the Bible_
The later articles are especially helpful in historical and contextual
reconstruction in an effort to understand the nuance of this difficult
biblical Hapax.
------------------------------
From: Carl W Conrad <cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 19:45:50 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
On Sun, 23 Apr 1995, Gary Meadors wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Apr 1995, Edgar M. Krentz wrote:
> > Teubneriana texts. As far as the punctuation goes, one should take the
> > punctuation of all editions with a grain of salt, since they are all
> > editorial decisions, whether by early scribes or modern editors.
> True, but the UBS inclusion of punctuation variations provides numerous
> ILLUSTRATIONS of how editorial interpretive perception affects the
> presentation of texts, often to an unsuspecting audience.
> Beginning students of interpretation can benefit by having this pointed
> out to them. Thus, there is some value in retaining it in a manual GNT
> for classroom purposes.
I am somewhat wary about getting into this discussion because I am
fundamentally uninformed in the basics of textual criticism (my guild,
alas, is a different one), but I have been following this discussion with
great interest and intend to take steps to fill in some of the more
gaping lacunae in my equipment. Nevertheless, I think this is a very good
point here raised about punctuation. I remember my shock on first reading
the prologue of John's gospel and pondering the difference made by
putting a period in 1:3 after OUDE HEN and reading HO GEGONEN EN AUTWI
ZWH HN as a unit--and then reading Metzger's note on the battles over
orthodoxy fought over this punctuation. For me it was every bit as
eye-opening as Keats claims to have felt the experience of first reading
Chapman's Homer!
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130, USA
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
------------------------------
From: "Jeffrey L. Shelton" <jeffreys@durian.usc.edu.ph>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 1995 10:11:43 +0800
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
> While the NA27 apparatus is certainly better, I think an important
> question can be raised at this point. Are all the variants listed in
> the NA27 really that important, as opposed to the significant variants
> listed in UBS4? I don't want to sound like I'm oversimplifying, but is
> it really important to know of variansts supported by say, jsut
Tertullian
> and W
> to use a hypothetical example?
For translation surely this is more than right. What about, however, in
purely gathering possible ideas of what others perhaps thought the flow of
the text meant. Scribes often tried to simplify the passage as they
recopied and in doing so their simplification reflects their understanding
and often leads to insight in areas about which we may not have thought.
This might even, if the evidence of how the Greek mind preceived the
passage was strong enough, eventually lead to a different nuance in
translation.
> I don't think so. I wouldn't take that
> variant seriously because it lacks attestaion and it would not
> affect my exegesis in the least to know that there are some virtually
> impossible testual variants on a given passage. I know that's
> a subjective
> judgement, but I've learned to pay attention when p46, 33 81 and A agree
> agaisnt B, but not when only the second hand of D plus Armenian MSS
> support a reading. Some fo that stuff strikes me more as being along the
> lines of the detailed electronic info given when you buy computer
> accessories.
> I don't know what all the Underwiters Lab stuff means and it doesn't
> really
> affect me anyway in a direct way. I think the UBS4 is adequate for
> exegesis as a general rule,
exegesis or translation?
> though if there is an interesting variant,
> I'd go to the NA27 to get further info. Is that a reasonable approach or
> am I ovesimplifying too much?
>
> Ken Litwak
> Emeryville, CA
Regards,
Jeffrey L. Shelton
President: Cebu Bible College
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Jeffrey Shelton - Ph:(63)(32) 465-374; Cell:(63)(915) 207-0251 *
* P.O. Box 435 - Fido: Jeffrey.Shelton@f1.n754.z6.fidonet.org *
* Cebu City 6000 Philippines - Internet: jeffreys@durian.usc.edu.ph *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:38:11 CST
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27 (Punctuation)
On Sun, 23 Apr 1995, Gary Meadors wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Apr 1995, Edgar M. Krentz wrote:
>
>>
>> Teubneriana texts. As far as the punctuation goes, one should take the
>> punctuation of all editions with a grain of salt, since they are all
>> editorial decisions, whether by early scribes or modern editors.
>>
>
>True, but the UBS inclusion of punctuation variations provides numerous
>ILLUSTRATIONS of how editorial interpretive perception affects the
>presentation of texts, often to an unsuspecting audience.
>Beginning students of interpretation can benefit by having this pointed
>out to them. Thus, there is some value in retaining it in a manual GNT
>for classroom purposes.
I can agree with both of these comments, but my concern for punctuation is
given in the light of discourse analysis. When one does discourse analysis,
one must divide the text according to its larger natural divisions: clauses,
sentences, paragraphs, and discourses. It helps, at least in terms of
presentation, if the punctuation corresponds to these natural divisions. If
my memory serves me right, UBS 1, 2, & 3 used commas to set off subordinate
clauses and colons, periods, and question marks to set off linguistic
sentences. The revised punctuation of UBS 3c & 4 also uses commas to set off
linguistic sentences. Thus the tendency to use the period to set off
microparagraphs becomes even more striking. The discourse analyst must
follow the natural structure. I am just saying that it would be nice to have
appropriate levels of punctuation used *consistently* to mark the same
linguistic units throughout the text. It would probably also help students
(of course, the proper use of punctuation marks seems to be a mystery to many
of them anyway :-).
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Bruce Terry <terry@bible.acu.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 21:44:06 CST
Subject: Re: Memorisation of Principal Parts
On Sat, 22 Apr 1995, Bill Mounce wrote:
>Its not so much that I don't like the term "principal parts," its that I
>couldn't get a could, clean definition of it, and I couldn't get my friends
>in English grammar to agree on an English definition.
How about "those parts of a language designed principally to throw students
into utter confusion"?
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #680
*****************************
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
majordomo@virginia.edu
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
"help".
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
owner-b-greek@virginia.edu
You can send mail to the entire list via the address:
b-greek@virginia.edu