RE: John 8:7

From: Andrew Kulikovsky (anku@celsiustech.com.au)
Date: Thu Feb 12 1998 - 18:41:11 EST


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim West [SMTP:jwest@Highland.Net]
> Sent: Friday, February 13, 1998 10:05 AM
> To: Andrew Kulikovsky
> Cc: b-greek@virginia.edu
> Subject: RE: John 8:7
>
> At 09:32 AM 2/13/98 +1030, you wrote:
> >
> > [Andrew]
> > Don't you mean "the pericope which many believe (including E
> >Hobbs) to be non-original". Considering we don't have the originals
> and
> >only a handful of manuscripts and fragments from the early centuries
> it
> >does seem a little premature to pronounce the pericope as definitely
> >"non-original".
> >
> > cheers,
> > Andrew
>
> In fact, the decision to describe the pericope as secondary is based
> on
> quite sound scientific methods known as textual criticism. While text
> critics certainly do not agree on everything, in this case I can
> fearlessly
> say that every experienced text critic who handles NT mss would say
> that
> this passage is an addition to the gospel. Again, perhaps it would be
> useful to consult Metzger's book or that by Kurt Aland- or even the
> new book
> by DC Parker on the text of the Gospels.
>
        [Andrew]
        I understand TC very well and I have Metzger's book.

        I also understand that TC is not an exact science and that text
critics are not exact people.
        QED.

        cheers,
        Andrew

-- 
Andrew S. Kulikovsky B.App.Sc(Hons) MACS
Software Engineer
CelsiusTech Australia
Endeavour House,Technology Park,
The Levels, S.A. 5095
Phone :	+61 8 8343 3837 (Direct)
Fax : +61 8 8343 3778
Email :	anku@celsiustech.com.au

"God is dead." -- Nietzsche "Nietzsche is dead." -- God



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:03 EDT