From: Dave Washburn (dwashbur@nyx.net)
Date: Tue Jun 05 2001 - 10:35:46 EDT
After I read the post about the suggested comma in Codex
Vaticanus (B), I asked my friends on the Textual Criticism list
about it. I received a response from a professional textual critic in
Germany who spends more time with the manuscripts and their
facsimiles than any of us here ever will. Here is his response:
-------
Dave Washburn wrote:
> Someone on another list just said that the original hand of B
(brown
> ink) has a comma in the much-disputed passage Luke 23:43 ("I
tell
> you today," vs. "I tell you, today"). I had always understood that
> the original hand of B didn't have any such marks, that the
> accents, punctuation etc. were added by a later hand. Did I hear
> wrong?
I have looked at it in the facsimile and it's correct that there is a
brown dot there, but
I would term it "of unknown origin". It is most probably only a blot.
There is no extra
space between the letters which one would expect if this is a
comma. I
would not base
anything on this.
From my reading in Vaticanus, I can say that there are some
original high points, but few.
I have not observed this systematically though.
----------
Thus, as I suspected, the "evidence" from B is at least as shaky
as the other suggested "evidence," and is certainly not enough to
base an exegetical or theological decision on. Intrinsic probability
still favors putting the comma after SHMERON, and we still have
no real historical, exegetical, theological or textual evidence to the
contrary.
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"You just keep thinking, Butch. That's what you're good at."
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:59 EDT