Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (HoLogos) — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:56:09 GMT

If a papyrus of scripture found in a trash heap in Oxyrhynchus contains a reading different from all other Greek manuscripts, I probably reject that READING. If a papyrus found in a trash heap has a reading that agrees with most early uncials and disagrees with the Byzantine stream, it has credibility. It may be right, it may be wrong, but has a strong possibility of being right, if the only uncial it disagrees with is K.

I can show you plenty of wrong readings in Codex K, the...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (77) — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:09:13 GMT

FJAHort wrote:
We don't know why they ended up there.
The question is interesting.
Perhaps the Arabian conquests were a reason?
I don't know if there is an exact stratigraphy available for those rubbish heaps.

Gibbons records at some length the persecution of Christian subjects and their manuscripts under the reign of at least several emporors; could the question...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (StevenAvery) — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:31:58 GMT

Hi Folks,

Tatermonkey wrote:
Thats gonna take me a little while to find.

Even five would be nice, theoretically if the NASV was working such a "broad scale" textual analysis you would have many dozens to choose from. Feel free to ask others to help you in this quest.

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Tatermonkey) — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:23:02 GMT

Thats gonna take me a little while to find.

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (StevenAvery) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:22:37 GMT

Hi Folks,

A few verses is all I asked.
If you don't have any, simply say so.

Shalom,
Steven

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Tatermonkey) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:21:55 GMT

and

http://www.bible-researcher.com/nasb-preface.html

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Tatermonkey) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:47:49 GMT

http://en.w...pedia.org/w.../Novum_Testamentum_Graece

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblia_Hebraica

I dont know how it is in some prints but my NASB reads the...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (StevenAvery) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:50:45 GMT

Hi Folks,

Tatermonkey wrote:
Its mostly eclectic. Alexandrian text style is primary but not the rule of thumb. NASB for example compared all Greek manuscripts and even Syriac, Coptic, Latin and other early manuscripts. Compare and contrast on a broad scale.

Can you find verses where the 'eclectic" NASV overruled the...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Tatermonkey) — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 02:28:03 GMT

Its mostly eclectic. Alexandrian text style is primary but not the rule of thumb. NASB for example compared all Greek manuscripts and even Syriac, Coptic, Latin and other early manuscripts. Compare and contrast on a broad scale.

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (StevenAvery) — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:22:01 GMT

Hi Folks,

Euthymius wrote:
I am saying only that I would have had a far stronger tendency to trust those manuscripts that had been preserved in churches or monasteries as opposed to those which ended up discarded in those rubbish heaps.

Amen. Quite simple.

Euthymius...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Armchair Scholar) — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:15:17 GMT
I saw a special on the Egyptian Oxhyryncus (sp) mss a while back and it was kind of interesting. Some of the fragments they showed did actually match rather closely to the mss and versions we have today.

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (amarillo) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:01:58 GMT
> The issue being raised by Luijendijk is not Sinaiticus, but the Egyptian papyri.

guess so. but hey, how'bout some nice MS calligraphy fr the trashcan? here's the latest pix fr the providentially preserved Sinaiticus:

http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/

neat eh?

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Euthymius) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:08:22 GMT
BriantT: The underlying assumption for the whole issue is that those pages were put in the trash because of textual corruption. I submit that was not the reason, as the rest (bulk) of the document was carefully kept,

The issue being raised by Luijendijk is not Sinaiticus, but the Egyptian papyri. Why the fragments we have of papyri from Egyptian rubbish heaps were there is the unknown factor. Obviously the bulk of the manuscripts from which the fragments came no longer exist, for...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (BrianT) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:06:52 GMT
The underlying assumption for the whole issue is that those pages were put in the trash because of textual corruption. I submit that was not the reason, as the rest (bulk) of the document was carefully kept, and Tischendorf himself says the pages were to be burnt because they were "mouldered by time". It is entirely reasonable that whoever put those pages in that pile to be burnt had no idea what they were, but was some monk uninterested and not aware, but rather simply trying to...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (FJAHort) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:39:20 GMT
We don't know why they ended up there.
The question is interesting.
Perhaps the Arabian conquests were a reason?
I don't know if there is an exact stratigraphy available for those rubbish heaps.

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Euthymius) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 09:21:07 GMT
Hort: What do you want to say? That because they have been found in rubbish heaps, they are not worth much?

I am saying only that I would have had a far stronger tendency to trust those manuscripts that had been preserved in churches or monasteries as opposed to those which ended up discarded in those rubbish heaps. Seems like the same position is held by the Nestle/UBS editors, given their frequent rejection of papyrus-based readings where such do not agree with the other vellum...

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (FJAHort) — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 00:53:38 GMT

Euthymius wrote:
This certainly should make one wonder and perhaps reconsider the value of such evidence when so many supposedly "important" and significant papyri derive from what are merely Egyptian rubbish heaps (a term used even by Deissmann). Food for thought.

What do you want to say?
That because they have been found in rubbish heaps, they are not worth much?

Re: Trash and the Question of Reliability

feeds@yuku.com (Euthymius) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:17:09 GMT
Amarillo: Sinaiticus being found in the wastepaper baskets of St Catherine was just that, a legend.

Not according to Tischendorf's own account of the matter (relating, however, only to some 43 OT leaves of Sinaiticus (in Genesis, as I recall), and not to the NT or even the bulk of its Septuagint portion. Certainly the AnneMarie Luijendijk: A Dirty Little Secret: Sacred Scriptures as Trash

From her abstract:

"Papyrologists found numerous fragments of sacred scriptures thrown away at garbage heaps of ancient...