Well, I just spent the last 3 hours studying New Testament manuscripts and weighing the pros and cons of whether an article was present in the original or if it was added by a copyist later. It is a tedious process of looking through a lot of expensive books.
But I love it. I don't know why, but I am facinated by history. I love studying old things.
Alas, tomorrow I must go and clean filth out of carpets again....
5 comments:
Honey, I'm so proud of you for prevailing in your school work! You are so incredibly intelligent! YAY FOR YOU, you bible geek! Love ya!
me
So, was the article present in the original? I didn't know you were taking Greek. Are you back in school? Good for you! Learning Greek is definitely a worthy undertaking!
Well, since you asked, the manuscript evidence is split. That is why it took an hour. I had to look up each manuscript to see its background (where it was done, when, etc.) and weigh the evidence in support of each one. In the end I decided that a slight edge went to the non-inclusion of the article. Not that it matters much here, but the inclusion or lack of an article can have a profound effect on the meaning of a passage. And secondly, yes, I am back in school. There is a seminary here in Salem I am currently attending. This semester I am taking Greek Exegesis (Greek 5).
Way to go, Bob! Greek is a great thing to learn. I am fascinated by the process you went through to find the truth of the interpretation. Thanks for explaining it to me.
Post a Comment