best and favorite commentary set

[ugotdave]

Michael,
I truly am not trying to be sneaky or confuse anyone, I just wanted to know what Greek Manuscript was used to say that the word "kainh/j" is used in Mat 26:28. Because I looked , and did not find the word "kainh/j" in any Greek Manuscript.

[Michael Hanel]

Vince,

Using BW, what Greek Translation do you see the word "kainh/j" in for Matthew 26:28 GNT, BNT, BNM, etc?

I want to say something about the notes, but we need to clear this up first.

I am sure he will grant you that the word "kainh/j" is not in GNT. However the GNT is not a Greek manuscript, it's a collection of readings selected from many manuscripts, Greek and otherwise. However if you had in front of you the Nestle-Aland with a textual critical apparatus you would see that there are various readings for this verse. and in these various readings some manuscripts DO have the word "kainh/j" in them. If you need a version within BibleWorks that shows that look up Scrivener.

Anyway you still need to clarify your argument.
1. That kainh/j shows up in NO Greek manuscript is patently FALSE
2. That kainh/j should be the original reading surely is a topic open for debate

[Michael Hanel]

Michael,
I truly am not trying to be sneaky or confuse anyone, I just wanted to know what Greek Manuscript was used to say that the word "kainh/j" is used in Mat 26:28. Because I looked , and did not find the word "kainh/j" in any Greek Manuscript.

then maybe this is the problem. how do you define Greek manuscript? GNT, BNT, etc. all those things in Bibleworks are not Greek manuscripts, but versions of the NT that are taken FROM readings of various Greek manuscripts. Thus GNT is not the same as any Greek manuscript extant, but is a variety of readings chosen by the editorial board of the Nestle-Aland group. In any case, what Vince and I are trying to say is that you can't look at BibleWorks alone unless you open Tischendorf's Critical Apparatus.

Sorry I feel like we're like ships passing in the night here, i'm trying to clarify it by saying that you can't see textual evidence merely by looking at BibleWorks....

[ugotdave]

Michael,
Thank you for clarifying that with me.
I stand corrected!
But, it's dialog like this that will help me understand the scriptures better.
Now I can move on with Vince.

Thank you again Michael

[Gontroppo]

G'day Dave.
You will find kainh/j in these versions in Matthew 26:28
BYZ, STR, STE

But I'm still not clear on your point in all this. Are you saying we should not call the Christian Greek Scriptures The New Testament?

I was merely pointing out that this terminology comes from older Englsih versions of the New Testament. [Whoops! Said it again!]

David McKay
www.davidmckay.info
Yesterday our grandson, Jerome, visited us in our home for the first time. He is 4 months old now.

[vr8ce]

I think Dave *is* saying what he wants to, it just may not be coming out right...Thus the note itself contradicts Dave's final sentence...

Exactly, which was my point all along. He says three times what is directly contradicted in the notes I pointed him to.

For the record, note that I'm not saying the "new" *should* be there, merely that it is. And it is definitely in Luke, so it's something of a non-issue for the original discussion anyway.

[ugotdave]

David,

The errors of my ways:

I failed to look at all Greek Translations for the word "kainh/j" and I also failed to take into consideration that the Greek Translations were made up of many Greek manuscripts, hence the word "kainh/j" being in some translations/manuscripts and not the others.

When I read the NET notes, and it said "Although most witnesses read kainh/j (kaineÒs, "new") here, this is evidently motivated by the parallel in Luke 22:20. ..." I also thought that the "witnesses" were the other parallel texts in scripture. i.e. Luke 22:20, 1 Cor 11:25, not other manuscripts.

Bad mistakes on my part.

To answer your questions, "But I'm still not clear on your point in all this. Are you saying we should not call the Christian Greek Scriptures The New Testament"?

I was pointing out that I found some issues with the text in Mat 26:28, I was wrong in that!
No, I am not saying that we should call the Christian Greek Scriptures "The New Testament".

I gathered that since you swayed towards the NCT camp, and if so, you would have a dispensational thinking towards the scriptures, to some degree. So, when you presented the scriptures Mat 26:28, 2 Cor 3:6, and 2 Cor 3:14, I started to take a closer look at them to see if they carried along the theme of dispensationalism. i.e. New doing away with the Old.

But I still wonder who coined the phrasres "Old Testament & New Testament", it surly looks like a NCT understanding of the scriptures. As an attempt to seperate the scriptures.

[ugotdave]

Vince,
You said, "That's not what I think of when I hear "old", so there's no "we" there, only "you". Old conveys perfectly what Paul was saying, especially since it's contrast to the "new" covenant."

Just curious, what is your interpretation of the word "Old" here?

[vr8ce]

Vince,
You said, "That's not what I think of when I hear "old", so there's no "we" there, only "you". Old conveys perfectly what Paul was saying, especially since it's contrast to the "new" covenant."
Just curious, what is your interpretation of the word "Old" here?

I pretty much answered that with "since it's contrast to the 'new' covenant."

[Gontroppo]

Hi Dave
I don't think I am a dispie, but NCT is intended to be a middle road between Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology.

But, as I said before, all Christians see elements of continuity and discontinuity in the relationship of the Christian message to the message revealed to the Old Testament folk.

The NCT message is quite similar to what John Bunyan thought and taught.

David McKay
www.davidmckay.info