OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 24, 2014, 01:10:20 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Byzantine vs Critical Text ?  (Read 14477 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #90 on: August 30, 2006, 11:47:06 PM »

You are still missing the point. The Byzantine text-type wouldn't be the official new Testament of the Church, and the Alexandrian wouldn't have been discarded, unless if there were a reason.

And I disagree. You don't have any record of an intent to choose one over the other; all you have is the outcome.

Quote
But again, we are talking in circles. If you are able to provide an Orthodox authority who endorses the Alexandrian text-type as superior to the Byzantine, please do so.

What they say, as I've pointed out over and over again, with numerous citations to boot, is that they don't care nearly as much as you try to make out.
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #91 on: August 31, 2006, 03:38:46 AM »

You don't have any record of an intent to choose one over the other; all you have is the outcome.

And given that the Holy Spirit leads the Church to all truth, it is an outcome worthy of my trust.

What they say, as I've pointed out over and over again, with numerous citations to boot, is that they don't care nearly as much as you try to make out.

The citations which I've provided show otherwise. Orthodoxy, as you should well know, means "right belief" and "right worship." The Orthodox Church wrote the New Testament, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for the purpose of liturgical life, theological study, and the personal path toward sanctification. Therefore, it is important for the text which one reads to be free of obvious corruption, as to avoid a corruption of Orthodoxy. If the quality of transmission did not matter, there would be no need to have one text as canonical over another. One text would need not be discarded as inauthentic, while the other approved and copied.

You've apparently missed the comparison made between the text-types of Homer's Odyssey and the Byzantine, Alexandrian, and Western text-types of the New Testament. That, among other things, can be found in the scholarly article provided.

Quote
17. A transmissional approach to textual criticism is not unparalleled. The criticism of the Homeric epics proceeds on much the same line. Not only do Homer's works have more manuscript evidence available than any other piece of classical literature (though far less than that available for the NT), but Homer also is represented by MSS from a wide chronological and geographical range, from the early papyri through the uncials and Byzantine-era minuscules.38 The parallels to the NT transmissional situation are remarkably similar, since the Homeric texts exist in three forms: one shorter, one longer, and one in-between.

18. The shorter form in Homer is considered to reflect Alexandrian critical know-how and scholarly revision applied to the text;39 the Alexandrian text of the NT is clearly shorter, has apparent Alexandrian connections, and may well reflect recensional activity.40

19. The longer form of the Homeric text is characterized by popular expansion and scribal "improvement"; the NT Western text generally is considered the "uncontrolled popular text" of the second century with similar characteristics.

20. Between these extremes, a "medium" or "vulgate" text exists, which resisted both the popular expansions and the critical revisions; this text continued in much the same form from the early period into the minuscule era.41 The NT Byzantine Textform reflects a similar continuance from at least the fourth century onward.

21. Yet the conclusions of Homeric scholarship based on a transmissional-historical approach stand in sharp contrast to those of NT eclecticism:

We have to assume that the original ... was a medium [= vulgate] text... The longer texts ... were gradually shaken out: if there had been ... free trade in long, medium, and short copies at all periods, it is hard to see how this process could have commenced. Accordingly the need of accounting for the eventual predominance of the medium text, when the critics are shown to have been incapable of producing it, leads us to assume a medium text or vulgate in existence during the whole time of the hand-transmission of Homer. This consideration ... revives the view ... that the Homeric vulgate was in existence before the Alexandrian period... [Such] compels us to assume a central, average, or vulgate text.42

22. Not only is the parallel between NT transmissional history and that of Homer striking, but the same situation exists regarding the works of Hippocrates. Allen notes that "the actual text of Hippocrates in Galen's day was essentially the same as that of the mediaeval MSS ... [just as] the text of [Homer in] the first century B.C. ... is the same as that of the tenth-century minuscules.43

23. In both classical and NT traditions there thus seems to be a "scribal continuity" of a basic "standard text" which remained relatively stable, preserved by the unforced action of copyists through the centuries who merely copied faithfully the text which lay before them. Further, such a text appears to prevail in the larger quantity of copies in Homer, Hippocrates, and the NT tradition. Apart from a clear indication that such consensus texts were produced by formal recension, it would appear that normal scribal activity and transmissional continuity would preserve in most manuscripts "not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of very ancient text."44
http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Robinson2001.html

Enjoy the read, my friend, and may the intercession of Theotokos be with you. If there is anything more you'd like to discuss, please PM me.

Peace.


« Last Edit: August 31, 2006, 03:50:03 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #92 on: August 31, 2006, 07:08:24 AM »

The citations which I've provided show otherwise.

No, they don't. I've provided citations from the denominational websites; you've cited individuals. It is one of the basic principles of the web that one can find someone to espouse almost anything.

And let's go to Mark chapter 16 in the RSV:

Quote
1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Mag'dalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salo'me, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. 2 And very early on the first day of the week they went to the tomb when the sun had risen. 3 And they were saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the door of the tomb?" 4 And looking up, they saw that the stone was rolled back; -- it was very large. 5 And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed. 6 And he said to them, "Do not be amazed; you seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen, he is not here; see the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee; there you will see him, as he told you." 8 And they went out and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid.

9 Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it. 12 After this he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country. 13 And they went back and told the rest, but they did not believe them. 14 Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they sat at table; and he upbraided them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. 15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover." 19 So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. 20 And they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by the signs that attended it. Amen.k

The footnote is as follows:

Quote
kSome of the most ancient authorities bring the book to a close at the end of verse 8. One authority concludes the book by adding after verse 8 the following: But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. Other authorities include the preceding passage and continue with verses 9-20. In most authorities verses 9-20 follow immediately after verse 8; a few authorities insert additional material after verse 14.

So you see, your cavilling was for nought.

Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #93 on: October 12, 2006, 03:11:20 AM »

A footnote proves nothing other than the bias of its translator. The shorter version of Mark's Gospel is exemplary of the abridged nature of the Alexandrian text-type. Have you still not read A Case for Byzantine Priority? I finished it weeks ago.

Peace.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2006, 03:18:11 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #94 on: October 12, 2006, 08:53:34 AM »

You waited a month and a half to make such a lame comment? If you'll kindly disable the knee-jerk reaction for a moment, you'll notice that it is the longer ending that is in the text. As for your remark about footnotes: bosh.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #95 on: October 12, 2006, 09:00:33 AM »

You waited a month and a half to make such a lame comment? If you'll kindly disable the knee-jerk reaction for a moment, you'll notice that it is the longer ending that is in the text. As for your remark about footnotes: bosh.


He didn't wait a month and a half, Keble; he pasted every other Orthodox forum out there on this topic - and got similar "ho-hum" responses.  Cheesy
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Jakub
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,748



« Reply #96 on: October 12, 2006, 11:53:49 AM »

I gave up on this topic before the crash of 06...

JB
Logged

An old timer is a man who's had a lot of interesting experiences -- some of them true.

Grant me the senility to forget the people I never liked anyway, the good fortune to run into the ones I do, and the eyesight to tell the difference.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #97 on: October 12, 2006, 12:18:37 PM »

I gave up on this topic before the crash of 06...

JB

Well done, James the Wise.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
FrChris
The Rodney Dangerfield of OC.net
Site Supporter
Taxiarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 7,252


Holy Father Patrick, thank you for your help!


« Reply #98 on: October 12, 2006, 12:33:54 PM »

the crash of 06...

I really like that phrase to refer to our latest batch of troubles...

The Crash of '06
Logged

"As the sparrow flees from a hawk, so the man seeking humility flees from an argument". St John Climacus
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #99 on: October 12, 2006, 02:25:30 PM »

As for your remark about footnotes: bosh.

What is the purpose of having such a footnote, other than creating doubt concerning the textual transmission of the New Testament?

The Orthodox Church is, in belief and practice, that same Church which was founded on the day of Pentecost. For 2,000 years our Church has survived without corruption and without change.
If we could preserve Apostolic Tradition through the centuries, what would prevent us from having preserved the New Testament, which was written by the Orthodox Church, in its true form?

Peace.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2006, 02:26:31 PM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #100 on: October 12, 2006, 02:56:06 PM »

What is the purpose of having such a footnote, other than creating doubt concerning the textual transmission of the New Testament?

You infer malice, and therefore accuse maliciously. The footnote simply reports the fact that manuscript copies are conspicuously inconsistent at this point (as they are with the Pericope of the Adulteress, another passage which has a lengthy footnote); the reader may do with it what he may. The facts cannot be hidden by so easy a means as the omission of a footnote; and I at least expect that a Christian should read scripture under the direction of tradition, which in your case would be to prefer the main reading over that of the footnote.

If you want to know the purpose of the footnote, read the RSV preface, instead of engaging in what ammounts to character assasination against its translators.

Quote
The Orthodox Church is, in belief and practice, that same Church which was founded on the day of Pentecost. For 2,000 years our Church has survived without corruption and without change.

With this bit of bluster you've moved yourself from the "chaser after eccentricities" to the "swaggering ideologue" column in my list of problem interlocutors. I am not so ignorant that I would accept this claim from anyone, much less from you. Only sectarian cranks believe this sort of stuff, and if you are ging to stick with it I shall quit bothering to convince you of your errors and move to trying to warn everyone else away from you.
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #101 on: October 12, 2006, 03:14:28 PM »

Only sectarian cranks believe this sort of stuff

The Orthodox Church is not a sect, it is the original Church of Christ. To be an Orthodox Christian is to accept that it is the uncorrupted, unchanged Church of Christ and His Apostles. Any other assertion would be heterodox. As the Church of Christ, Orthodoxy has preserved the New Testament through the centuries.

Peace.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2006, 03:15:53 PM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #102 on: October 12, 2006, 03:32:20 PM »

Matthew, I don't need to waste my time further. It's one thing when you are arguing for your eccentricities, but you've stopped trying to convince me.
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #103 on: October 12, 2006, 04:01:09 PM »

Then please look further:

www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7051.asp

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #104 on: November 26, 2006, 02:49:33 AM »

The objection that fundamentalist Protestants and certain Eastern Orthodox Christians have toward the Alexandrian text-type seems to be mainly theological, out of the misguided belief that the school of Alexandria was somehow "Monophysite."

Even our friend Maurice A. Robinson, in his Case For Byzantine Priority, subtlety makes this accusation:
Quote
Despite modern eclectic expressions regarding what NT textual criticism "really" needs, modern text-critical thought steadily moves away from the highest ideals and goals. Current eclectic speculation involves heterodox scribes who are claimed to have preserved a more genuine text than the orthodox,165 as well as a general uncertainty whether the original text can be recovered, or whether any concept of an "original" text can be maintained.166 The Byzantine-priority position offers a clear theoretical and practical alternative to the pessimistic suppositions of postmodern eclectic subjectivity. The various eclectic schools continue to flounder without an underlying history of transmission to explain and anchor the hypothetically "best attainable" NT text which they have constructed out of bits and pieces of scattered readings. In the meantime, the Byzantine-priority theory remains well-founded and very much alive, despite the orations and declamations which continue to be uttered against it.
http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Robinson2001.html

But my objection to the Alexandrian text is not theological. The Syriac Peshitta, the traditional Biblical text of my church, agrees with the Alexandrian in some places, and the Byzantine in others. What I find unsatisfying with the Alexandrain text-type is its omission of the resurrection in Mark's Gospel, an important part which the Peshitta retains.

Peace.

« Last Edit: November 26, 2006, 02:53:21 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #105 on: November 26, 2006, 02:53:54 AM »

Unbelievable...

This must be a case of "Advanced Trolling"
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #106 on: November 26, 2006, 03:38:10 AM »

Disagreeing with everything and anything I say, no matter how tempting, does not automatically count as a well thought position. Whatever hostility you may have against me is certainly misplaced. I have nothing but love for you, so please do not allow contentiousness to cloud your reasoning.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #107 on: November 26, 2006, 03:49:23 AM »

Not that most of your input requires a lot of heavy thinking, Matthew/Pensees. Your latest obsessions on biblical texts has little to do with faith or the Church (yours or mine) and a lot to do with these fora being a hobby for you.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #108 on: November 26, 2006, 03:53:07 AM »

One could say that gaining a better understanding of our traditional Biblical text, and other things relating to our history, liturgy, and theology, is a hobby of mine. But I have no intention of showing off, and worldly prestige is of no concern to me. The Syriac Peshitta, and the general truth of the New Testament, is of more importance than me as a particular individual.

I cannot accuse the Alexandrian text-type of being heretical, because it is a product of the Coptic Church, which is a member of the Oriental Orthodox communion. While I disagree with certain parts of the Alexandrian text-type, it is certainly not without value.

Peace.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2006, 03:57:43 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #109 on: November 26, 2006, 11:59:53 PM »

The thing is, though, that you have set terms for such "better understanding" which guarantee that it will never come. Why obsess over the lack of the resurrection account in the shortest versions of Mark?
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #110 on: November 27, 2006, 01:48:23 AM »

While I find no theological fault in the Alexandrian text-type, it appears to be the work of sloppy transmission. The Syriac Peshitta is probably as old as the manuscripts representing the Alexandrian text-type, and therefore provides a good witness for the longer ending of Mark.

Peace.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2006, 01:48:50 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #111 on: December 05, 2006, 05:11:17 AM »

This might prove relevant:

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
Wilbur N. Pickering, ThM PhD
http://www.esgm.org/ingles/appendh.h.htm

I disagree with some of its theological opinions, but it's at least helpful for comparing text-types.

This is its section on Mark 16:

Quote
Problem: A serious aberration is introduced—it is affirmed that Mark's Gospel ends with 16:8.

Discussion: UBS3 encloses these verses in double brackets, which means they are "regarded as later additions to the text," and they give their decision an {A} grade, "virtually certain". So, the UBS editors assure us that the genuine text of Mark ends with 16:8. But why do critics insist on rejecting this passage? It is contained in every extant Greek MS (about 1,800) except three (really only two, B and 304—Aleph is not properly "extant" because it is a forgery at this point).[13] Every extant Greek Lectionary (about 2,000?) contains them (one of them, 185, doing so only in the Menologion). Every extant Syriac MS (about 1,000?) except one (Sinaitic) contains them. Every extant Latin MS (8,000?) except one (k) contains them. Every extant Coptic MS except one contains them. We have hard evidence for the "inclusion" from the II century (Irenaeus and the Diatessaron), and presumably the first half of that century. We have no such hard evidence for the "exclusion".
http://www.esgm.org/ingles/appendh.h.htm

And this is the footnote to Mark 16 in the Orthodox Study Bible:

Quote
Some manuscripts do not include this longer ending. Later traditions testify to several endings. The Church, however, has always regarded the longer ending as canonical and inspired. 

Peace.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2006, 06:20:13 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Marc Hanna
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox - Coptic/Armenian
Jurisdiction: Canada
Posts: 319



« Reply #112 on: March 25, 2008, 01:28:33 PM »

I'm still puzzled about this "Byzantine" business. As I said, my Greek isn't good enough for this, and every version I've found that I can read omits the word "fasting", but every version includes the word "prayer", including the RSV-- at least all that I've checked. I haven't looked in the NAB, NEB, REB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, and NWT (just kidding on the last one-- I have a copy, but I don't care what it says), but it's a pretty save bet at this point that they all conform to the RSV text on this point. If someone can find a Greek version that includes he wod "fasting", then there might be something to this comparison. As it is, you're comparing negatively a modern translation prepared with some Orthodox input to an old translation produced entirely by Anglicans. I don't think we're looking at a difference between the Textus Receptus and the Sin./Vat./Freer texts here, though.


All four of my Greek bibles contain the word fasting - 2 are majority texts and the other 2 are Textus Receptus.  The Nestle-Aland texts, Westcott and Hort Texts, and the United Bible Society Texts all omit the word fasting; these texts comprimise about 95% + of the Greek texts in circulation today.  These texts were assembled on the basis that the older the manuscript the better regardless of whether or not the chosen reading can be found in a single other manuscript.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2008, 01:32:52 PM by Marc Hanna » Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.099 seconds with 50 queries.