On Greek text crit

[bkMitchell]

Well, now...

שׁמי סכוֹת

λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή· οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, εἰ μὴ δι᾽ ἐμοῦ.


I'm gonna assume these both show up in Hebrew and Greek. The Hebrew is from Davka, and the Greek from the BW editor.

Yes, I am using firefox ,even, and I can see both the Hebrew and the Greek you have typed.
You typed, "my name is Scott" (Hebrew) and "Jesus said I am the way, the truth and the life, no one (can) comes to the father if not through me"(Greek).

Also, it just dawned on me that one can use Window XP or Windows 7's language tool bar to type in different languages on these forums, too.

[ISalzman]

Great guys. But couldn't we prevail upon the good folks who control the boards here at BibleWorks to add Hebrew and Greek fonts to the dropdown menu of available fonts? Now Gordie Howe was a fine example of someone who used to control the boards!

[MGVH]

And here is the inherent problem with the various apparatusus. See if you can deduce that this is the text of Vaticanus B in John 1:13 from any of them...

"oi ouk ex anqhpwpwn oude ek qelamatoj sarkoj all ek qeou egenhqhsan"

In other words, Vaticanus B reads "not from man or from the will of the flesh but born of God"

Are you sure about that? Here's a pic of Vaticanus. (Verse 13 starts with the last 4 letters of the top line)



Yes, it is clear that the οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρὸς phrase has been omitted and is added in the margin by a corrector.
It is also clear that the original has ἐγενήθησαν and that a corrector has added the missing nu.
BUT, it is also clear that the text reads ἐξ αἱμάτων (not ἐκ ανθρωπων as you indicate).

Also, you may find the Laparola database helpful that I mentioned above. Here is what it looks like:
>>>

>>>
If you look for the B* (ie, the original hand) and B2 (superscript 2 indicating corrector #2) references, I think it does correctly and accurately reflect Vaticanus to the point that one could reconstruct it.
I'm not saying there aren't problems elsewhere as you argue, but John 1.13 looks fairly straightforward.

The NA27, in its very concise form, does correctly provide all the relevant information for Vaticanus as well.

[bkMitchell]

Great guys. But couldn't we prevail upon the good folks who control the boards here at BibleWorks to add Hebrew and Greek fonts to the dropdown menu of available fonts?...

But, you can sort of..

1. Browse the Bibleworks forums and pick some thread you want to reply, to
2. Click on the IME on the task/tool bar and change the imput language to HE Israeli or another HE keyboard( like tyndale) layout you have installed or El for Greek.
3. Pick the font you want to type in from Bibleworks forums drop down font menu

Remember all the fonts used on the forums are Unicode complaint so most should have both Hebrew and Greek. However, you need to tell your computer which language you would like to type and use Bibleworks forum to select the font.

this works for many languages for example: Japanese 日本語, Greek ἡ ζωή ἡ ζωή ἡ ζωή, Hebrew וְיִנָּתֵן וְיִנָּתֵן וְיִנָּתֵן

Sure, it might have been easier for you the other way and you can continue to ask but while you wait I sure you might like to type in Hebrew and Greek.

[MGVH]

I have usually found it easier to copy text to the BW editor, then copy that text and paste here where it will show up in Unicode.
You can also type if you have installed Unicode keyboards. I'll switch to my Greek keyboard and start typing...
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο
Almost all the available fonts will do unaccented Greek. If you want to type with accented Greek, then use the Palatino Linotype.

[Mark Eddy]

(1) the Vaticanus B reads something like:


John 1:13 οἳ οὐκ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ Θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησα


(VS the usual printed editions')


John 1:13 οἳ οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκός(σαρκὸς), οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ Θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησαν.

Vaticanus (B) is available in BW in one of the user databases. But that text (Tischendorf's Transcription) is not at all what Adelphos says that B actually says. Here is Tischendorf's Transcription:
οἳ οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς [οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρὸς] ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ θῦ ἐγεν[ν]ήθησα
I produced the above by copying Unicode from the BW browse window into the editor, dropping off letters not in B, and putting brackets around words in the margin and letters added between the lines.
So, is Adelphos saying that Tischendorf's Transcription is actually NOT a transcription of B? The transcription is actually much closer to the printed edition than what Adelphos wrote. What form of B does Adelphos have available that we do not have in BW?
Mark Eddy

[bkMitchell]

I have usually found it easier to copy text to the BW editor, then copy that text and paste here where it will show up in Unicode. You can also type if you have installed Unicode keyboards. I'll switch to my Greek keyboard and start typing...

Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο
Almost all the available fonts will do unaccented Greek. If you want to type with accented Greek, then use the Palatino Linotype.

Hey, thanks for mentioning this Mark. This is really a great idea. I recall someone said something along the same lines. See post #19:

What, I have been doing, recently, is typing Hebrew/Greek Unicode in Bibleworks Editor and then cutting and pasting to my post when I reply to a thread...

[bkMitchell]

Vaticanus (B) is available in BW in one of the user databases. But that text (Tischendorf's Transcription) is not at all what Adelphos says that B actually says...So, is Adelphos saying that Tischendorf's Transcription is actually NOT a transcription of B? The transcription is actually much closer to the printed edition than what Adelphos wrote. What form of B does Adelphos have available that we do not have in BW?Mark Eddy

I think Adelphos, can and probably will speak for himself on this issue.
Till he does so I will tell you I think he was specifically speaking about the apparati VS his experience with the Vaticanus from working with it and other manuscripts(see post #4 of this thread).

As of the late 90's, I was only the living human on the planet who had personally collated Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus Aleph and Codex Bezae and a few other manuscripts in the New Testament. Nobody else had claimed to have done so... Back then, you'll remember, I had to use real books with the text of these manuscripts and do everything by hand.

In any case, I was vociferous back then about the legions of errors in the NA/UBS Critical Apparatus, and the extraordinarily sparse and misleading coverage of those two works. That drew a lot of snickers at the time.But then Reuben Swanson came out with his collations and totally corroborated everything I had been saying. Since Swanson, others have done the same.
Swanson's quotes and a very small example of the avalanches of errors of those works can be seen in my article on 1 Timothy 3:16 here --
http://lamblion.net/Articles/ScottJo..._citations.htm

In fact, there is not a person on this planet who is more familiar with the actual TEXT of Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus Aleph than me. I'm not talking about the paleography, for many have delved more deeply into that in recent years, but as for the actual TEXT, I know it backwards and forwards.
I have literally lived with those two manuscripts and their manifest corruptions for many years now, in addition to studying the collations of others, such as Hoskier, Burgon, Swanson, as well as the various textual anaysis' that have been conducted on them by others...

[Adelphos]

I copied the text straight out of Tischendorf's edition of printed edtion of Vaticanus exactly as he transcribed it. Here it is exactly in the true Greek font --

oi ouk ex anqrwpwn oude ek qelhmatoj sarkoj all ek qeou egenhqhsa

Morever, there are so many assertions of various correctors in B and Aleph that one can never be certain which is which. It is up to each to take the word of whoever asserts which correcter did which correction.

For example, Tischendorf asserted that one of the correctors of Aleph was a twelth or thirteenth century hand. Ultraviolet technology in the twentieth century refuted Tischendorf's assertion in this matter.

In any case, the text above has been the accepted version of Tischendorf ever since he published his edition.

[Adelphos]

And since it was asserted that one might be able to reconstruct B in John 1:13 strictly from the apparatus, although I doubt anyone really could, nevertheless, if you'd care to try, please reconstruct BOTH B and Aleph -- or either one by itself -- in John 1:21 from the apparatuses.

Good luck.

And that's just ONE example out of REAMS UPON REAMS UPON REAMS.