Wow! Excellent, Greg! I'm truly amazed at the stuff people on this list
know.

Lou Cook


Greg responds:


Not really.

First of all, there are two main collections of texts (limiting our
discussion to the Greek New Testament, and totally neglecting the impressive
integrity of the Hebrew Bible). There are Stephen's Textus Receptus, which
formed the basis of translation for the King James Bible, which were
probably the best available in those days. Then there is the collection of
texts published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), which are, with minor
changes in punctuation (which was not used at all at the time of writing)
and critical apparatus, identical to the Nestle-Aland 26th edition. The
Nestle and Aland families have been the sponsors of most of the work in
textual criticism of the Greek New Testament in this century. Of course,
since the manuscripts are well-known, scholars (and anyone else) are free to
disagree over the significance of the normally minor variations in the text.


Most of the translations I have looked at, including some publications of
the KJV, include not only variant translations of the same term, but variant
readings. So, for instance, a number of translations will include a note for
Ephesians 1:1 that three early manuscripts omit the reference rendered "at
Ephesus". While this tidbit is important to one's understanding of the
audience and perhaps the author of the letter, it does not largely affect
one's understanding of the letter itself. In fact, it is the problems of
translation that provide more shades of meaning than textual variants. For
instance, for certain verbs, and for certain forms, the indicative (he
reads) is identical in form to the imperative (eat!). So, for some passages,
it is a matter of discussion whether a verb is a statement of fact, or a
command. Same problem with certain forms of indicative and subjunctive: is
it a statement of how things are, or how they should be? And yet, context
helps, and while these are grist for the mill, the difference can be so
subtle as to be but trivial shades of meaning.

But as for the opportunity to capriciously choose texts, that can only work
if one does not care if anyone else uses one's translation. And, since there
are other translations readily available to compare and contrast, the net
effect is small.

Now, as for the Hebrew Bible, there is far less opportunity for caprice.
And, while the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls is profoundly important,
and there are questions about the forms of the texts found, they attest to
the accurate preservation and transmission of the text, failing to testify
to the presumed redactions.

Greg Stigers
http://www.cgiusa.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johnson, Tracy [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 10:36 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: OT Greek Texts [was: Global Warming Called 'Fairy Tale']
> Sensitivity: Confidential
>
>
> I suggested no such thing regarding any translation.
> Let me toss translation out the window.
>
> what I'm saying is different.
>
> I'm saying the underlying text is chosen by prejudice
> by the translator, according to denomination, even
> before translation begins.
>
> P.S. you can turn the "Confidential" flag off, it
> was sent to the list.  ;^)
>
> Tracy Johnson
> MSI Schaevitz Sensors

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *