Abstract
The textual criticism of the New Testament (2): An exercise in theory and practice This concluding article on New Testament textual criticism focuses on the practical application of a workable method for the evaluation of textual variants in the manuscripts of the New Testament. Six variation units displaying a wide variety of textual problems are discussed, viz the ending of Mark’s gospel, the theological/christological problem in John 1:18, the possible conjectural emendation in Acts 16:12, the ortographical variation in Romans 5:1, the doxology at the end of Romans, and the so-called “command to silence” in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. The next result in each case does not necessarily produce rousing new insights, but it underlines the need for a balanced approach which weighs all the evidence without prejudice before making a decision on the value of a textual variant.
Highlights
The textual criticism of the New Testament (2): An exercise in theory and practice. This concluding article on New Testament textual criticism focuses on the practical application o f a workable method for the evaluation o f textual variants in the manuscripts o f the New Testament
The nett result in each case does not necessarily produce rousing new insights, but it underlines the need for a balanced approach which weighs all the evidence without prejudice before making a decision on the value o f a textual variant
Die besinning oor die metodologie van die Nuwe-Testamentiese tekskritiek in deel 1 van hierdie studie het aangetoon dat die gematigde eklektiese metode as breë gedagterigting tans die mees gemotiveerde en kontroleerbare tekskritiese oplossings bied[1], alhoewel die metode steeds met definitiewe voorbehoude en inagneming van sy tekortkominge toegepas behoort te word[2]
Summary
Die besinning oor die metodologie van die Nuwe-Testamentiese tekskritiek in deel 1 van hierdie studie het aangetoon dat die gematigde eklektiese metode as breë gedagterigting tans die mees gemotiveerde en kontroleerbare tekskritiese oplossings bied[1], alhoewel die metode steeds met definitiewe voorbehoude en inagneming van sy tekortkominge toegepas behoort te word[2]. Gesien dat nagenoeg 60% van die variasie-eenhede in die UBS3-teks se tekskritiese apparaat ’n {C} of {D} gradering het en dus ’n redelike mate van onsekerheid vertoon[3], is die ses probleme wat hier aangespreek word, maar ’n druppel in die emmer. Tog raak die variasieeenhede ’n wye verskeidenheid tekstuele probleme en verteenwoordig dit van die belangrikste en oudste neute wat die voornemende tekskritikus nog altyd gehad het om te kraak. By die aanpak van so ’n studie is dit natuurlik altyd raadsaam om die woorde van Bruce M Metzger deurgaans in gedagte te hou: "In textual criticism, as in other areas of historical research, one must seek to learn what can be known, and to become aware of what, because of conflicting witnesses, cannot be known”[4]. ‘ Hierdie artikel is ’n verwerking van ’n werkstuk wat ingedien is as deel van die vereistes vir die M Div-graad aan die Universiteit van Pretoria onder studieleiding van Prof A B du Toit
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
