b-greek-digest V1 #678
b-greek-digest Saturday, 22 April 1995 Volume 01 : Number 678
In this issue:
Textual commentary to UBS 3/4
Re: UBS4 & NA27
Re: the new standard text (Kilpatrick)
Re: 1 Tim 2:12, AUTHENTEIN
Re: Textual commentary to UBS 3/4
Re: Greek Text Editions
Re: "Biblical" Greek?
Re: UBS4 & NA27
From: Edward Hobbs <EHOBBS@wellesley.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:00:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Textual commentary to UBS 3/4
Thanks to Meadors for the news about a new Textual Commentary to UBS4!
It isn't listed in the cartalog they sent me two weeks ago (how do you find
out?) [or even in the catalog!].
Perhaps it would be unkind to mention that in the volume
"A New Textus Receptus Redivivus?" [on UBS3], I said that this commentary
by Metzger has explanations (which will keep you awake nights" (in shock,
I meant). So I won't mention it.
As you see, Nichael Cramer's suggestion that a fund be started to
buy me a new editor has ample justification! But unhappily, while I am
in mail, I can only use the VAX editor, as primitive as EMACS, and hence
cannot correct anything once typed. (When I'm serious and have time,
I write my response in WordPerfect, convert it to ASCII, send it to
LUCY, then send it out on MAIL. Really simple, huh?)
THE great virtue of UBS3 over NA26 was its typeface (AAAh,
to be young again! -- to quote another colleague on the List! But
my 25-year-old eyes have given way to eyes which cannot see flyspecks
so well). UBS4 has lost that advantage. So what we really want is
either the original UBS1, or the NA26, which had a far better text,
in the opinion of not only me but of all my colleagues at Harvard
a decade ago. (I can't speak for now; but George MacRae, Helmust
[Helmut} Koester, John Strugnell, and Krister Stendahl agreed with
me at the time, and had me address a general meeting of NT PhD
candidates on the topic.
When I wrote a negative letter to Allen Wikgren about the
changes from UBS1 to UBS3, he replied, "I was simply outvoted!"
The addition of Carlo Martini to the committee turned the tide; and
now it is even worse. Dust off your old TR's friends, and burn
your WH's! The Byzantine Text will be back -- just wait!
George Kilpatrick of course (for other reasons, too), was
in hearty agreement with this sense of despair, as of course is
his one-time student J.K.Elliott (already quoted on this List).
I think it was Bart Ehrmann who noted some time ago that the
tendency of UBS$ was to upgrade readings from D to C, C to B, and
B to A. My cursory comparison confirms this, to my grief.
So, to go one further than a recent poster, put your
old NA25 (not 26), or earlier edition, in your pocket! (And
get a new pair of glasses, of course.)
From: "Larry W. Hurtado" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 16:17:54 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
On Fri, 21 Apr 1995, Paul Moser wrote:
> In one of the helpful reviews mentioned by Larry Hurtado
> (I believe), J.K. Elliott concludes as follows:
> "Given the fact that NA and UBS have the same text, and
> given my observation that UBS may not satisfy the requirements
> of the clientele to which it is directed, it may be concluded
> that there seems to be no practical or academic reason
> for the continued existence of the UBS edition.... By using
> UBS not only translators but the students, academics, and
> clergy who undoubtedly buy this edition are denying themselves
> exposure to the riches and variety found in NA27. Perhaps
> publicity for UBS4 ought to carry a strong health warning
> to that effect" (*Theol. Literat.*, 1994, p. 496). The
> suggestion here seems to be that for exegetical and text-
> critical work, one ought to go with NA27. I wonder if any
> listmembers are inclined to confirm this. --Paul Moser,
I can confirm Elliot's statement of facts, and second his recommendation
to any serious exegetes about the advantages of NA27 over UBS4 for help
in assessing original readings.
Larry Hurtado, Religion, Univ. of Manitoba
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:52:55 -0400
Subject: Re: the new standard text (Kilpatrick)
Concerning going back to an earlier Nestle text (I started with the 21st I
think). In 1983-84 I was fortunate to meet with George Kilpatrick
fortnightly for tea and then a discussion so something that he had written
for about an hour and a half. In one session, he had just gotten a copy of
the Text of the NT according to the Majority Text (Hodges). He wrote a
review in which he compared it with the UBS3 in 24 places of variation. He
agreed with the Majority Text in 14 and with the UBS in only 13. In his
review he surmised that they were both counting manuscripts but that the UBS
committee had eliminated most of the Manuscripts before they started
From: Larry Swain <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 15:06:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: 1 Tim 2:12, AUTHENTEIN
Hello Tim, and congratulations on the upcoming nuptials.
On Fri, 21 Apr 1995 Timster132@aol.com wrote:
> I have a question from 1 Tim 2:12.
> DIDASKEIN DE GUNAIKA OUK EPITREPO OUDE AUTHENTEIN ANDROS, ALL' EINAI EN
> When [Dt-]Paul says he does not permit a wife to teach nor "to have
> authority" over her husband, the word he uses for "to have authority" is not
> EXSOUSIAZW, which is what I expected to find, but instead he uses the word
AUTHENTEIN usually means something like exercising one's own authority
with almost the flavor of usurpation, or to domineer or dominate in its
negative sense. EXSOUSIADZW deals more with faculties, authority which
is given. Or at least so my experience has been.
I would like to make two other points. First, the context of this
passage has to do with proper behavior in church, not with relationship
betwwen husband and wife. The passage begins and ends with exhortations
to modesty in prayer and behavior for both men and women. Second, is the
idea of "silence and submission" well-the word silence would be better
translated as quietness, as it is in verse 2 of the same chapter. And
quietness and submission are the modest attitudes of a student to his or
her teacher. So much for my .02-hope it helps.
> Does AUTHENTEIN have a significantly different meaning than EXSOUSIADZW?
> I'd appreciate your input, as my finance and I are approaching our
> wedding day, July 1, and we have been studying various biblical texts about
> husband/wife relationships. Thanks.
> Tim Staker
From: Gary Meadors <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:47:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Textual commentary to UBS 3/4
For Prof. Hobbs,
I purchased my _A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament_, Second
Edition (for UBS4), at a recent conference directly from an ABS display.
The pages are thinner than the former and bleed through a bit, but the
type appears to be the same. Old = 775 pages; New = 696. The type
is slightly smaller and more compact. I have not yet accounted for the 76
pages. The type and packing may come close to it.
I didn't site the catalog # in my previous post because it appeared to be
the first edition.
From: Gary Meadors <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 19:54:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Greek Text Editions
Helmut Koester made some interesting comments last Nov in his review of
Bard Erdhmans _Orthodox Corruption of Scripture_ at the SBL meeting.
Perhaps some in this group can elaborate....
He stated that a comparison of the NA19 reveals that the NA26 emended the
text to "orthodoxy".
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 21:00:30 -0400
Subject: Re: "Biblical" Greek?
In response to ...:
"I would not disagree with anything here so much as add a qualification to
it. These facts about Paul's special usages of PNEUMA, SARX, etc. (on which
I've thought Bultmann's _Theology of the NT_ is especially good, regardless
of what one thinks of his other projects) are not unique to NT authors--Plato,
Aristotle, Philo, Greek authors of many eras and in many genres have their
own distinctive vocabularies and almost or even technical usage of particular
... May I submit:
Yes, I concur with this observation. My intention was not to conclude that
the NT is the only corpus in which unique semantic domains are developed and
used, rather that there are indeed unique semantic inferences to be drawn
from the usages of some words in the NT, thus there is that about the Greek
language which can be considered unique to the NT. By this I do not mean to
imply that NT Greek is a language development unique to itself, viz.,
separate from the Greek language in terms of evolution.
One of the fascinating things about the Greek language is its longevity. It
has been around for a very long time. Over the ages it has developed to its
current state. Koine is one of the stages it went through along the way.
The NT writers used this particular stage of the language. In the process th
ey used words ordinary to the language at that stage. Some of these words
they used in ways which were not ordinary to the language. To be sure, they
are not unique in this. Also, I don't think the assertion is valid that the
Greek of the NT is a "divinely inspired" language, so inspired only for the
purpose of transmitting the NT, and so is linguistically unique from the
larger context of Hellenism.
Thanks for the reply,
- -Paul B.
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 22:06:28 -0400
Subject: desubscribe please!
Please desubcribe me from this firstname.lastname@example.org
From: "Edgar M. Krentz" <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 22:38:08 -0600
Subject: Re: UBS4 & NA27
Paul Moser asked a question=20
>> In one of the helpful reviews mentioned by Larry Hurtado
>> (I believe), J.K. Elliott concludes as follows:
>> "Given the fact that NA and UBS have the same text, and
>> given my observation that UBS may not satisfy the requirements
>> of the clientele to which it is directed, it may be concluded
>> that there seems to be no practical or academic reason
>> for the continued existence of the UBS edition.... By using
>> UBS not only translators but the students, academics, and
>> clergy who undoubtedly buy this edition are denying themselves
>> exposure to the riches and variety found in NA27. Perhaps
>> publicity for UBS4 ought to carry a strong health warning
>> to that effect" (*Theol. Literat.*, 1994, p. 496). The
>> suggestion here seems to be that for exegetical and text-
>> critical work, one ought to go with NA27. I wonder if any
>> listmembers are inclined to confirm this. --Paul Moser,
Some might be interested in Kurt Aland's own description of the two
editions of the Greek New Testament many years ago:
"Ganz ohne Zweifel wird das Greek New Testament von einer ganzen=
Studenten gebraucht, wahrscheinlich liegt es auch dem Unterricht=
wenigen Theologischen Seminaren zugrunde. Das entspricht aber weder=
Absichten des Herausgeberkomitees noch denen der f=FCr die Ausgabe
verantwortlich zeichnenden Bibelgesellschaften. Denn f=FCr eine--und=
auch im abgeleitenden Sinn--wissenschaftliche Besch=E4ftigung mit=
des Neuen Testaments kommt nur eine Ausgabe in Betracht, welche zu=
einer oder zwei Stellen pro Seite einen textkritischen Apparat bietet,=
wie das im _Greek New Testament_ der Fall ist. So ist vom
Herausgeberkomitee--das ja fur beide Ausgaben identisch ist--von=
eine Aufgabenteilung ins Auge gefa=DFt worden. Die des _Greek New=
ist oben beschrieben worden, die des Nestle-Aland wird dem Benutzer=
beim Aufschlagen evident: er bietet (unter Beibehaltung seines
Sigel-Systems) einen textkritischen Apparat, der alles enthalt, was=
einer wissenschaftlichen Hand-aus=1Fgabe billig erwartet werden kann.
[_Bericht der Stiftung zur Forderung der neutestamentlichen Textforschung
fur das Jahr 1969_. M=FCnster/Westfalen; p. 25.]
I insist on the Aland text in any classes I teach, since the inner=
give the Eusebian canons and the paragraphing of some ancient MSS.=
outer margins have very useful references--though they are not the=
the ones in the Aland _Synopsis quattuor evangeliorum_. I find the=
references to the Greek font in Aland 27 hard to understand. It is=
elegant, and much easier to read than the fonts in the old Bibliotheca
Teubneriana texts. As far as the punctuation goes, one should take=
punctuation of all editions with a grain of salt, since they are=
editorial decisions, whether by early scribes or modern editors.
I appreciate the references to the reviews of the two editions posted
earlier. They will join my data base on the history of the printed=
Edgar M. Krentz
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
(Voice) Home: 312/947-8105; Off.: 312-753-0752
End of b-greek-digest V1 #678
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
You can send mail to the entire list via the address: