From: Tom Belt (virginia@destination.com.lb)
Date: Wed Dec 16 1998 - 12:13:43 EST
>Re the originality of GAR: I think Fee is putting the matter a
>little too strongly. P46, and Vaticanus in Paul's letters, IMHO, are
>frequently accorded undue weight. P46, in view of its great age (c. 200
>C.E?) can indeed be of great importance when it agrees with other
>important witnesses. But it does not possess the *independent* value
>often given it. Vaticanus likewise in Paul's letters displays a definite
>strain of peculiar and secondary "Western" readings, often in agreement
>with secondary readings found in p46. The uncials Sinaiticus and
>Alexandrinus are, I think, in Paul clearly superior in the quality of
>their text, and even the important later minuscules 33, 1739, and 81
>approach or exceed the value of Vaticanus.
>
>The external evidence in this case is thus quite close, but would seem to
>tip slightly in favor of Sinaiticus, A, D, 33, and 81 over p46, B and
>1739. The internal probabilities here are tricky and could probably be
>argued either way. The decision in NA to include GAR as most likely
>what Paul wrote, but enclose it in brackets to indicate a fair degree of
>doubt about it, seems judicious.
>
>Jim Ware
My thanks to all who responded to my request on 1 Cor. 14.14. ALL the
comments were helpful. If I may I'd like quickly to explore the internal
probabilities of GAR at v. 14. What of Fee's point regarding the near
impossibility of accounting for a scribe's omitting GAR either intentionally
or accidentally?
Blessings,
Tom Belt
virginia@destination.com.lb
Evangelical Assemblies of God of Lebanon
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:10 EDT