|
Citations
Chapter 5 - Ancient
Manuscripts, Modern Bibles, and The Da
Vinci Code
[885] 1 Kings 4:26 (King James Version)
[886] 2 Chronicles 9:25 (King James Version)
[887] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875.
Page 21 states that "perhaps" 19 out of 20 ancient copying errors are "purely of
a verbal kind" and are only worthy of note to "philologists and grammarians."
Pages 23-24: "No parts of ancient books have suffered so much from errors of
inadvertency as those that relate to numbers; for as one numeral letter was
easily mistaken for another, and as neither the sense of the passage, not the
rules of orthography, not of syntax, suggested the genuine reading, when once an
error had arisen, it would most often be perpetuated, without remedy."
[888] Life Application Study Bible: New King James
Version. General editor:
Bruce B. Barton. Tyndale House Publishers, 1996. First published in 1988.
1 Kings 4:26 cites the figure of "fortyh thousand," and note "h" states:
"Following the Masoretic Text and most other authorities; some manuscripts of
the Septuagint read four (compare 2 Chronicles 9:25)."
NOTE: The Terms "Masoretic Text" and "Septuagint" will be explained later.
[889] Ancient Work: Antiquities of the Jews. By Flavius Josephus. Translated by
Louis H. Feldman. Loeb Classical Library: Josephus, Volume 9. Harvard University
Press, 1965. Book 20, Section 267.
[890] Web Page: "The Imperial Index: The Rulers of the Roman Empire."
An Online
Encyclopedia of Roman Emperors, Updated July 21, 2002.
http://www.roman-emperors.org/impindex.htm
[891] Article: "Paleography." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite
2004.
Help in dating is offered by changes in styles of handwriting and variations
from area to area. Abbreviations in texts likewise help in dating and
localization. … Moreover, few books were dated, the dated title page being
nonexistent in medieval works, though sometimes a final paragraph, the colophon,
supplies a date with the scribe's name and place of work. … In the absence of
dates, inferences are drawn from handwriting, use of abbreviations, and internal
evidence.
[892] Article: "Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004. The section entitled "Texts and versions" states:
Paleography, a science of dating manuscripts by typological analysis of their
scripts, is the most precise and objective means known for determining the age
of a manuscript. Script groups belong typologically to their generation; and
changes can be noted with great accuracy over relatively short periods of time.
Dating of manuscript material by a radioactive-carbon test requires that a small
part of the material be destroyed in the process; it is less accurate than
dating from paleography.
[893] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875. Page 183:
For the purpose of establishing the antiquity, genuineness and integrity of the
scriptures, no other proof need be adduced than that which is afforded by the
ancient versions now extant. When accordant translations of the same writings,
in several unconnected languages, and in languages which have long ceased to be
vernacular, are in existence, every other kind of evidence may be regarded as
superfluous.
[894] Entry: "Bible." Smith's Bible Dictionary. By William Smith. A.J. Holman &
Co., 1884.
"The Old Testament was written in Hebrew, a Shemitic language, except that parts
of the books of Ezra (Ezra 5:8; 6:12; 7:12-26) and of Daniel (Daniel 2:4-7,28)
and one verse in Jeremiah (Jeremiah 10:11) were written in the Chaldee language
[Aramaic]."
[895] Article: "Old Testament." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite
2004.
"Except for a few passages in Aramaic, the Old Testament was written originally
in Hebrew during the period from 1200 to 100 BC."
[896] Life Application Study Bible: New King James Version. General editor:
Bruce B. Barton. Tyndale House Publishers, 1996. First published in 1988.
The "Vital Statistics" section for each book of the Bible provides dates when
written. The earliest books of the Old Testament are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Deuteronomy, which are dated between 1450 and 1406 B.C. The dating
of the Book of Job is unknown, but may be the oldest book of the Old Testament.
The most recent books are Malachi and First/Second Chronicles, which are dated
to 430 B.C.
[897] Book: The Dead Sea Scrolls. By Millar Burrows. Viking Press, 1955.
Page 302: "Old, worn-out manuscripts were discarded…. The result is that no
Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament older than the ninth century A.D. have
been preserved…."
[898] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 23: "More than six thousand manuscripts belonging to the group of [the
Masoretic text] are known."
NOTE: The term "Masoretic text" is explained in the citation below.
[899] Article: "Masoretic Text." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
This article notes that the word "Masoretic" stems from the Hebrew word meaning
"tradition." It defines the Masoretic text as the "traditional Hebrew text of
the Jewish Bible" and states, "The Masoretic work enjoyed an absolute monopoly
for 600 years, and experts have been astonished at the fidelity of the earliest
printed version (late 15th century) to the earliest surviving codices (late 9th
century)."
[900] Article: "Dead Sea Scrolls." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
"Though the documents themselves date from the mid-3rd century BC to AD 68, the
majority were composed during the 1st century BC and 1st century AD. The oldest
manuscripts are biblical."
[901] Book: The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. By Geza Vermes. Penguin
Press, 1997.
Pages 10-11 state that "all of the books of the Hebrew Scriptures are extant
save Esther, the absence of which may be purely accidental."
[902] Book: Essential Guide to Bible Versions. By Philip Comfort. Tyndale House
Publishers, 2000.
Page 30: "Due to natural decay, most of the surviving ancient manuscripts are
fragmentary and difficult to read."
[903] Book: The Dead Sea Scrolls. By Millar Burrows. Viking Press, 1955.
Page 303: "The St. Marks manuscript of Isaiah is the only one of the scrolls
that contains a whole book of the Bible…."
[904] Book: Essential Guide to Bible Versions. By Philip Comfort. Tyndale House
Publishers, 2000.
Page 26. "It is dated to [about] 100 B.C."
NOTE: The callout for this Scroll is 1QIsaa.
[905] Book: The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. By Geza Vermes. Penguin
Press, 1997. Seventh edition. First published in 1962.
Page 15: "Before 1947, the oldest Hebrew text of the whole of Isaiah was the Ben
Asher codex from Cairo dated to 895 C.E., as against the complete Isaiah Scroll
from Cave 1, which is about a millennium older."
[906] Article: "Samaritans." Smith's Bible Dictionary (electronic edition). By
William Smith. Revised and edited by F.N. and M.A. Peloubet. Thomas Nelson,
1997.
"The law (i.e., the five books of Moses) [these are first five books of the
Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers Deuteronomy, also known as the Torah
or Pentateuch] was their sole code; for they rejected every other book in the
Jewish canon."
[907] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 82 states that the texts of the Samaritan Bible "were written in the
'early' Hebrew script…." {The pages that follow explain the difficulty of dating
these texts.}
Page 83: "The earliest known manuscripts of [the Samaritan text] were written in
the Middle Ages."
[908] Article: "Septuagint." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite
2004.
Analysis of the language has established that the Torah, or Pentateuch (the
first five books of the Old Testament), was translated near the middle of the
3rd century BC and that the rest of the Old Testament was translated in the 2nd
century BC. The name Septuagint (from the Latin septuaginta, "70") was derived
later from the legend that there were 72 translators, 6 from each of the 12
tribes of Israel, who worked in separate cells, translating the whole, and in
the end all their versions were identical.
[909] Book: The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church. By Roger
Beckwith. Eerdmans Publishing, 1985. Pages 20- 21:
[The Septuagint] is the earliest extant translation of the Old Testament.
Aristobulus [wrote] that the standard Greek translation of the Pentateuch was
made in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus at the suggestion of Demetrius of
Phalerum.18 The same story appears in a much more elaborate, and certainly
unhistorical form, in the letter of Aristeas, which, it now seems is later than
the time of Aristobulus. Aristobulus's brief statement is thus independent of
Aristeas, and though it is not wholly without historical difficulties, it shows
what was believed about 160 BC (and believed so firmly that it could be asserted
in a work addressed to the Ptolemy of the day), namely, that the Septuagint
Pentateuch had been translated about 100 years before…. [It] is consequently the
oldest datable Jewish work in Greek … and it originated in Alexandria. … Greek
translations of many of the other books of the Old Testament probably followed
the Pentateuch quite quickly, and by late second century BC the translator of
Ecclesiasticus, in his prologue, can refer to Greek versions of all three
sections of the Hebrew Bible. …
18 The extract containing this statement is found in Eusebius, Preparation for
the Gospel 13.12.
[910] Article: "Septuagint." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite
2004.
The text of the Septuagint is contained in a few early, but not necessarily
reliable, manuscripts. The best known of these are the Codex Vaticanus (B) and
the Codex Sinaiticus (S), both dating from the 4th century AD, and the Codex
Alexandrinus (A) from the 5th century. There are also numerous earlier papyrus
fragments and many later manuscripts.
[911] Book: Essential Guide to Bible Versions. By Philip Comfort. Tyndale House
Publishers, 2000.
Page 75: "Codex Sinaiticus contains the entire Old Testament, and the entire New
Testament…. Most scholars date it ca. [to about] 350–375."
[912] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875. Pages 183-184:
Thus it is that, independently of the original text, the Old Testament exists in
the Chaldee [Aramaic] paraphrases or Targums; in the Septuagint, or Greek
version; in the translation of Aquila, of Symmachus, and of Theodosian; in the
Syriac and the Latin, or Vulgate versions; in the Arabic and the Ethiopic; not
to mention others of later date.
[913] Book: The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature. Edited by M.C.
Howatson. Oxford University Press, 1989. First published in 1937 (Edited by Paul
Harvey).
NOTE: The chronological table on page 607 dates the earliest classical
literature to about 700 B.C.
[914] Book: The Cambridge History of Classical Literature. Volume 1. Edited by
P.E. Easterling and B.M. W. Knox. Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Page 714: "[L]ittle of what was written in Greek after the middle of the third
century A.D. can be considered 'classical' in any sense of that elastic term,
and most of it hardly qualifies as 'literature' at all."
[915] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875.
Page 183: "In this respect a comparison between the classic authors and the
Scriptures can barely be instituted; for scarcely anything that deserves to be
called a translation of those writers—executed at a very early period after
their first publication, is extant."
[916] Book: The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature. Edited by M.C.
Howatson. Oxford University Press, 1989. First published in 1937 (Edited by Paul
Harvey)
Page 559: "The manuscripts in which the works of Greek and Latin literature are
preserved for the most part date from the ninth to the fifteenth centuries AD….
[T]hey are thus at many removes from the author's autographs."
[917] Ancient Work: History of the Peloponnesian War. By Thucydidies. Translated
by Charles Forster Smith. Heinemann, 1928. First published in 1919. Volume 1.
Page ix states that Thucydidies was born "somewhere around 472 B.C."
Page xi: "It seems reasonable to assume that he was not alive in 396 B.C."
Page xxi lists 7 manuscripts, the oldest of which date to the 11th century.
[918] Ancient Work: The Gallic War. By Julius Caesar. Translated by H.J.
Edwards. Harvard University Press, 1958. First published in 1917.
Page ix states Caesar was assassinated in the year 44 B.C. {Ergo, this is the
latest this work could have been written.}
Page xv: "It is held by some scholars that the first seven books were composed
in the winter of 52-51 B.C., and published in early 51."
Page xvii lists 6 manuscripts, the oldest of which date to the 9th century.
[919] Ancient Work: The Histories. By Polybius. Translated by W.R. Patton.
Heinemann, 1922. Volume 1.
Page vii states that Polybius was born in about 208 B.C.
Page x states that he passed on at the age of 82.
Page xv lists 3 manuscripts, the oldest of which dates to the 10th century.
[920] Ancient Work: The Lives of the Twelve Caesars. By C. Tranquillus
Suetonius. Translation, introduction, and commentary by George W. Mooney.
Hodges, Figgis, and Company, 1930.
Page 12: "[T]he completed work was published, most probably in 121 A.D."
Page 46:"The codex Memmianus, written towards the end of the 9th century … [is]
the oldest and most trustworthy source of our MSS [manuscripts]."
NOTE: Pages 46-49 provide a short synopsis of the 150+ manuscripts that were
copied in the 9th through 14th centuries. In addition to these, it is stated
there are "numerous" manuscripts from the 15th century. These later manuscripts
contain some unique readings, and there is disagreement over whether these are
of value or are just "clever conjectures" inserted by copyists.
[921] Article: "Masoretic Text." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
When the final codification of each section was complete, the Masoretes not only
counted and noted down the total number of verses, words, and letters in the
text but further indicated which verse, which word, and which letter marked the
centre of the text. In this way any future emendation could be detected. The
rigorous care given the Masoretic text in its preparation is credited for the
remarkable consistency found in Old Testament Hebrew texts since that time. The
Masoretic work enjoyed an absolute monopoly for 600 years, and experts have been
astonished at the fidelity of the earliest printed version (late 15th century)
to the earliest surviving codices (late 9th century).
[922] Book: The Dead Sea Scrolls. By Millar Burrows. Viking Press, 1955.
Page 302: "For a thousand years or more, it was the regular practice of the Jews
to copy the text with meticulous accuracy and correct it very carefully
according to the official or Masoretic text. … The result is that … all the
surviving manuscripts agree almost exactly, except in very minute details."
[923] Article: "Masoretic Text." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
[924] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 23 states that "all printed editions of the Hebrew Bible are based on [the
Masoretic text]."
[925] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 19: "Because of its place in Judaism as the central text of the Hebrew
Bible, [the Masoretic Text] became the determinative text for the Hebrew Bible
of Christianity and of the scholarly world. All printed editions of the Bible
contain [the Masoretic text]."
[926] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992. Page 39.
[927] Paper: "New Light on Early Recensions of the Hebrew Bible." By W. F.
Albright. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, December 1955.
Page 28: "The greatest textual surprise of the Qumran finds [i.e., the Dead Sea
Scrolls] has probably been the fact that most of the scrolls and fragments
present a consonantal* text which is virtually indistinguishable from the text
of the corresponding passages in our Masoretic Bible."
NOTE:
* "The ancient Hebrew had only the consonants printed, and the vowels were
vocalized in pronunciation, but were not written." [Article: "Old Testament."
Smith's Bible Dictionary. By William Smith. A.J. Holman & Co., 1884.]
[928] Book: Essential Guide to Bible Versions. By Philip Comfort. Tyndale House
Publishers, 2000. Accessed at newlivingtranslation.com. Page 18:
Even though the Dead Sea Scrolls are nearly a thousand years older than the
Masoretic manuscripts, there are not as many significant differences between the
two groups of manuscripts as one might expect. Normally, a thousand years of
copying would have generated thousands of differences in wording. But this is
not the case when one compares most of the Dead Sea Scrolls with the Masoretic
manuscripts. This shows that Jewish scribes for over a millennium copied one
form of the text with extreme fidelity.
Page 16 states the Leningrad Codex was "used as the textual base for the popular
Hebrew texts of today…."
[929] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992. Pages 30:
When the early Qumran texts of the [Masoretic] group are compared with … [the
Leningrad Codex, a Masoretic manuscript dating from 1009 A.D.], one realizes how
close they are to medieval sources. … The combined evidence shows that the
consonantal framework of [the Masoretic text] changed very little, if at all, in
the course of more than one thousand years. Even more striking is that the texts
from the other sites in the Judean Desert are virtually identical with the
medieval texts, probably because they derived from similar circles.
Page 115 states that 35% of the Qumran scrolls match the Masoretic Text.
[930] Article: "Dead Sea Scrolls." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
This articles notes there is a copy of Leviticus dating from the 3rd century
B.C.
[931] Book: The Dead Sea Scrolls. By Millar Burrows. Viking Press, 1955.
Pages 319: "The fragments of Leviticus in the old Hebrew script which were found
in the first cave in 1949 gave us … our oldest witness to the text of any part
of the Bible. It is therefore significant that they agree almost entirely with
the Masoretic text of Leviticus."
[932] Book: The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. By Geza Vermes. Penguin
Press, 1997. Seventh edition. First published in 1962. Page 16:
By contrast, the Qumran scriptural scrolls, and especially the fragments, are
characterized by extreme fluidity; they often differ not just from the customary
wording but also, when the same book is attested by several manuscripts, among
themselves. In fact, some of the fragments echo what later became the Masoretic
text; others resemble the Hebrew underlying the Greek Septuagint; yet others
recall the Samaritan Torah or Pentateuch [first five books of the Bible], the
only part of the Bible which the Jews of Samaria accepted as Scripture. Some
Qumran fragments represent a mixture of these, or something altogether
different. It should be noted, however, that none of these variations affects
the scriptural message itself.
[933] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992. Page 99:
Even though the pre-Samaritan texts [i.e., some of the Dead Sea Scrolls] and
[Samaritan text] share distinctive typological traits and agree with each other
in many details, they also diverge from time to time. The number of
harmonizations differs somewhat in the various sources. [The Dead Sea Scroll]
4QpaleoExodm has less than [the Samaritan text], while [the Dead Sea Scroll]
4QNumb has more. In addition, individual texts of this group also display unique
readings.
Page 115 states that the pre-Samaritan texts comprise "no more than 5 percent of
the Qumran biblical texts of the Torah [first 5 books of the Old Testament]…."
[934] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 115: "Although no text has been found in Qumran that is identical or almost
identical with the presumed Hebrew source of [the Septuagint/Greek text], a few
texts are very close to [the Septuagint/Greek text]…."
Page 116: "The texts which are close to [the Septuagint/Greek text] comprise
some 5 percent of the Qumran biblical texts."
[935] Article: "Bible." Smith's Bible Dictionary. By William Smith. A.J. Holman
& Co., 1884.
"There are no ancient Hebrew manuscripts older than the tenth century, but we
know that these are in the main correct, because we have a translation of the
Hebrew into Greek, called the Septuagint, made nearly three hundred years before
Christ."
NOTE: The quote above predates the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. We now
have many Hebrew manuscripts older than the tenth century.
[936] Article: "Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004. The section entitled "Texts and manuscripts" states:
The … [Samaritan Bible, which is limited in content to the first 5 books of the
Hebrew Bible] constitutes an independent Hebrew witness to the text…. It
contains about 6,000 variants from the Masoretic text, of which nearly a third
agree with the Septuagint [Greek text]. Only a minority, however, are genuine
variants, most being dogmatic, exegetical, grammatical, or merely orthographic
in character.
[937] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 299: "It is indeed a fact that the readings of [the Masoretic Text] are, on
the whole, preferable to those found in other texts, but this statistical
information should not influence decisions in individual instances, because the
exceptions to this situation are not predictable."
[938] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992. Pages 236-237.
[939] "Preface to the New International Version Bible." By the Committee on
Bible Translation of the International Bible Society. June 1978, Revised August
1983.
http://www.biblica.com/niv/background.php
For the Old Testament the standard Hebrew text, the Masoretic Text as published
in the latest editions of Biblia Hebraica, was used throughout. The Dead Sea
Scrolls contain material bearing on an earlier stage of Hebrew text. They were
consulted, as were the Samaritan Pentateuch and the ancient scribal traditions
relating to textual changes. Sometimes a variant Hebrew reading in the margin of
the Masoretic Text was followed The translators also consulted the more
important early versions - the Septuagint; Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion; the
Vulgate; the Syriac Peshitta; the Targums; and for the Psalms the Juxta Hebraica
of Jerome. Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the
Masoretic Text seemed doubtful and where accepted principles of textual
criticism showed that one or more of these textual witnesses appeared to provide
the correct reading. Such instances are footnoted.
[940] Bible: New International Version. International Bible Society, 1984.
Genesis 4:8:
Now Cain said to his brother Abel, "Let's go out to the field."[a] And while
they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him. …
[a] Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Vulgate and Syriac; Masoretic Text does
not have "Let's go out to the field."
[941] Bible: New King James Version. Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1982. Genesis 4:8:
Now Cain talked with Abel his brother;[a] and it came to pass, when they were in
the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. ...
[a] "Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac, and Vulgate add "Let us go out to
the field."
[942] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 299: "It is indeed a fact that the readings of [the Masoretic Text] are, on
the whole, preferable to those found in other texts, but this statistical
information should not influence decisions in individual instances, because the
exceptions to this situation are not predictable."
[943] Same as above. Page 310.
[944] Same as above. Page 262.
[945] Same as above. Page 308.
[946] Same as above. Page 356.
[947] Same as above. Page 356.
[948] Same as above. Page 141: "The great problems surrounding the transmission
of the text of [the Septuagint] make the reconstruction of its presumed original
text difficult."
Page 140: "The Göttingen Septuagint series … comprises the most precise and
thorough critical editions of [the Septuagint/Greek text]. Each volume contains
a detailed critical apparatus in which the witnesses are divided into groups and
subgroups, so that readers can find their way through the maze of manifold
variants…."
[949] Book: The Septuagint as Christian Scripture. By Martin Hengel. T&T Clark,
2002.
Page 47: "The transmission of [the Septuagint/Greek text] was thoroughly
confused under the influence of the Jewish revisions and Christian testimonia
collections…."
[950] Article: "Septuagint." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite
2004.
"In the 3rd century AD Origen attempted to clear up copyists' errors that had
crept into the text of the Septuagint, which by then varied widely from copy to
copy."
NOTE: The work in which Origen did this is called the Hexpla.
[951] Book: The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research. By R. Timothy McLay. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003.
Page 6: "[M]ost specialists now reserve the term Old Greek (OG) to designate a
text that in the judgment of the scholar represents the original translation of
a book [in the Septuagint/Greek text]."
Pages 131-132: "In summary, the plethora of texts and revisions of the OG [Old
Greek] that cropped up during the first centuries of the common eras complicate
our field of inquiry even further.
Page 135:
The multiple text forms and textual fluidity that are the bane of the textual
critic's existence are complicated even further by the production of recensions
to the OG [Old Greek]. The works of kaige-Theodotion, Aquila, Symmachus, and
others contribute still more variant readings that are only partially preserved,
and not with any consistency. … Origen, through his creation of the Hexpla, is
primarily responsible for the preservation of many readings in the …
[Septuagint/Greek text] tradition, but his labor has made the present-day task
of reconstructing the OG more difficult. The lack of precision in the
attributions, questions about the nature and content of Origen's Hexpla, and the
inevitable corruption of the texts during the process of their copying supply
the contemporary textual critic with a jigsaw puzzle that is more than few
pieces short.
[952] Book: Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. By Emanuel Tov. Fortress
Press, 2001. Second edition. First published in 1992.
Page 85: "What characterizes the scribes of [the Samaritan text] and the
pre-Samaritan texts [i.e., some of the Dead Sea Scrolls] is the great freedom
with which they approached the Biblical text; contrast the tradition of
meticulous copying which characterized other texts."
[953] Article: "Sargon II." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite
2004.
This article states that Sargon II reigned from 721 to 705 B.C.
[954] Article: "In Praise of Ancient Scribes." By Alan R. Millard.
Biblical
Archeologist, Summer 1982. Pages 143-153. Pages 150-151:
Within the Old Testament are numerous foreign names, many of them alien to the
Western Semite. (Foreign names pose problems in all languages and scripts; the
various spellings of East European or Oriental names in our newspapers
illustrate that.) Where ancient writings of the names are available, detailed
study shows the Hebrew writings represent the contemporary forms very closely.
Thus the names of the Assyrian kings Tiglath-pileser and Sargon, as handed down
through the Old Testament, turn out to be accurate reflections of the Assyrian
dialect forms of these names. Tiglath-pileser is found in an almost identical
spelling on the Aramaic Bar-Rakkab stele from Zinjirli, carved during his reign,
or very shortly after. Sargon, occurring in Isa 20:1 … is spelled in Aramaic
letters on two documents. In the Aramaic letter written on a potsherd sent to
Ashur, the old Assyrian capital city, from southern Babylonia, Sargon appears as
sh, r, k, n, shar-ken, while on the Aramaic seals of one of his officers, known
from an impression found at Khorsabad, Sargon's new city in Assyria, it is s,
r,
g, n, sar-gon. It is exactly that spelling that has been preserved in the
traditional Hebrew text of the Old Testament…. A comparable precision can be
argued for other foreign names throughout the Old Testament, as continuing study
and discoveries indicate.
Page 152:
[I]n each case mentioned, the Septuagint [Greek text] differs considerably from
the Hebrew. Sargon in Isa 20:1 became Arna; Parshandatha was distorted through
Pharsannestain to become two names, Pharsan and Nestain, in Codex Vaticanus.
These cases, not confined to one book, should at least warn against reliance on
the Septuagint for emendation of proper names in the Old Testament, unless the
evidence against the Hebrew text is very strong indeed. …
In this light the way the Old Testament text is viewed by scholarship seems to
need some modification. The Dead Sea Scrolls make explicit what had been
previously supposed by many, that the Masoretic text preserves an earlier
text-type current in the century or so prior to the Fall of Jerusalem. Between
the completion of some books of the Old Testament and the Scrolls there is a
relatively short period of time. (How short will depend upon opinions about the
age of each book.) Only in that period can the great majority of the errors
textual critics and commentators claim to find in the Hebrew text have arisen.
Is it conceivable that those who copied Jeremiah's prophesy for over four
centuries made so many mistakes as to require on average four to six lines of
textual apparatus to every page in the current critical edition of the text, the
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia? Jeremiah may be peculiar in respect to its
Septuagint version, but the problems involved are such that to emend the Hebrew
on the basis of the Greek would seem a very risky business indeed.
Page 153: "The present argument is that we too freely underrate the ability and
the accuracy of those copyists to whom we owe the Old Testament. There are no
grounds for supposing they were less attentive to their task than those whose
products have been recovered in modern times."
[955] Article: "Bible." Smith's Bible Dictionary. By William Smith. A.J. Holman
& Co., 1884.
"The New Testament is written wholly in Greek."
[956] Book: The Canon of Scripture. By F.F. Bruce. InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Page 285: "One might expect that writers in Greek would use an accessible Greek
version of the ancient scriptures, that is to say, the Septuagint. The New
Testament writers did this to a very considerable extent. Luke and the writer to
the Hebrews in their biblical citations and allusions adhere quite closely to
the Septuagint wording."
[957] Book: Essential Guide to Bible Versions. By Philip Comfort. Tyndale House
Publishers, 2000.
Page 42: "The field of textual criticism is complex, requiring the gathering and
skillful use of a wide variety of information. Because it deals with the
authoritative source of revelation for all Christians, textual argumentation has
often been accompanied by emotion."
[958] Matthew 23:23-24: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for
ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier
matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and
not to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and
swallow a camel."
[959] Matthew 22:36-40
[960] Matthew 5:17-18
[961] Entry: "Jot - or Iota." Easton's Bible Dictionary. Thomas Nelson, 1897.
Third edition.
"[T]he smallest letter of the Greek alphabet, used metaphorically or
proverbially for the smallest thing (Matt. 5:18); or it may be = yod, which is
the smallest of the Hebrew letters."
[962] Entry: "Tittle." Easton's Bible Dictionary. Thomas Nelson, 1897. Third
edition.
"[A] point, (Matt. 5:18; Luke 16:17), the minute point or stroke added to some
letters of the Hebrew alphabet to distinguish them from others which they
resemble; hence, the very least point."
[963] Matthew 4:4 (KJV): "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not
live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
Deuteronomy 8:3: "[M]an doth not live by bread only, but by every word that
proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live."
[964] Matthew 4:7 (KJV): "Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt
not tempt the Lord thy God."
Deuteronomy 6:16: "Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God…."
[965] Book: The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research. By R. Timothy McLay. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003.
Page 117: "Other times, however, quotations … [from the New Testament] do not
correspond directly with our existing Old Greek [i.e. Septuagint] or Masoretic
Text."
[966] Article: "Old Testament." Smith's Bible Dictionary. By William Smith. A.J.
Holman & Co., 1884.
"In the quotations of all kinds from the Old Testament in the New, we find a
continual variation from the letter of the older Scriptures."
[967] Article: "Canon of the Old Testament." By George J. Reid.
Catholic
Encyclopedia, Volume III. Robert Appleton Company, 1908.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm
The most striking difference between the Catholic and Protestant Bibles is the
presence in the former of a number of writings which are wanting in the latter
and also in the Hebrew Bible, which became the Old Testament of Protestantism. …
The ancient Greek Old Testament known as the Septuagint was the vehicle which
conveyed these additional Scriptures into the Catholic Church.
[968] Bible: New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha: New Revised Standard
Version. Edited by Michael D. Coogan. Oxford University Press, 2001. In the
section entitled "Introduction to the Apocrypha," pages 3-4 state:
[T]he Apocryphal / Deuterocanonical books are those works that were included in
the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible with
additions … but are not included in the Hebrew text that forms both the canon
for Judaism and the Protestant Old Testament. …
"Apocrypha" means "hidden things," but it is not clear why the term was chosen
to describe these books. …
… Roman Catholics accept as fully canonical those books and parts of books that
Protestants call the Apocrypha (except the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, 3 and
4 Maccabees, and 1 and 2 Esdras, which both groups regard as apocryphal). …
Esther is given in its longer (Greek) form rather than in the version based
solely on the Hebrew text; the Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Jews
appear as verses 24-90 of chapter 3 of Daniel, and the stories of Susanna and
Bel and the Dragon as chapters 13 and 14 of Daniel. …
The Eastern Orthodox Churches recognize several other books as authoritative.
Editions of the Old Testament approved by the Holy Synod of the Greek Orthodox
Church contain, besides the Roman Catholic Deuterocanonical books, 1 Esdras,
Psalm 151, the Prayer of Manasseh, and 3 Maccabees, while 4 Maccabees appears in
the Appendix. Slavonic Bibles approved by the Russian Orthodox Church contain
besides the Deuterocanonical books, 1 and 2 Esdras (called 2 and 3 Esdras),
Psalm 151, and 3 Maccabees.
[969] Entry: "Purgatory." Webster's College Dictionary. Simon & Schuster, 1999.
"[A] place or state following death in which penitent souls are purified of
venial sins or undergo the temporal punishment still remaining for forgiven
mortal sins and thereby are made ready for heaven."
[970] Bible: New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha: New Revised Standard
Version. Edited by Michael D. Coogan. Oxford University Press, 2001.
In the section entitled "Introduction to the Apocrypha," page 5 states: "For
instance, disputes over the doctrine of Purgatory and of the usefulness of
prayers and Masses for the dead involved the authority of 2 Maccabees, which
contains what was held to be scriptural warrant for them (12.43-45)."
[971] Article: "Canon of the Old Testament." By George J. Reid.
Catholic
Encyclopedia, Volume III. Robert Appleton Company, 1908.
The word canon as applied to the Scriptures has long had a special and
consecrated meaning. In its fullest comprehension it signifies the authoritative
list or closed number of the writings composed under Divine inspiration, and
destined for the well-being of the Church….
The most explicit definition of the Catholic Canon is that given by the Council
of Trent, Session IV, 1546….
… The Council of Trent did not enter into an examination of the fluctuations in
the history of the Canon. Neither did it trouble itself about questions of
authorship or character of contents. True to the practical genius of the Latin
Church, it based its decision on immemorial tradition as manifested in the
decrees of previous councils and popes, and liturgical reading, relying on
traditional teaching and usage to determine a question of tradition.
[972] Book: The Septuagint as Christian Scripture. By Martin Hengel. T&T Clark,
2002. Pages 112-113:
On the basis of New Testament use of Scripture, it seems likely that the scope
of the Christian Old Testament would have been smaller than the Hebrew Bible.
Indeed, the church could have disregarded Qoheleth [Ecclesiastes], Canticles
[Song of Songs], 2 Ezra [Nehemiah] or Esther without difficulty. Here the model
of the Hebrew canon is evident; the 'canon lists' of a Melito [a second-century
Greek bishop] and later of Origen [a Christian who lived from about 185-254
A.D.] demonstrate that Christians wished to posses those Scriptures in their
entirety.
[973] Book: The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research. By R. Timothy McLay. Eerdmans Publishing, 2003. Page 103:
It was the great biblical scholar Jerome (lived from about 348-420 A.D.) who
defended the authority of the Jewish Scriptures in their original Hebrew
language and whose views were echoed by reformers like Martin Luther, who
prepared the way for the later dominance of the Hebrew canon for the Protestant
Church.
[974] Book: The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church. By Roger
Beckwith. Eerdmans Publishing, 1985.
Page 387: "[T]he New Testament, by contrast with the early Fathers, and by
contrast with its own practice in relation to the books of the Hebrew Bible,
never actually quotes from, or ascribes authority to, any of the Apocrypha. All
one can say is that there is an occasional correspondence of thought which
suggests a knowledge of some of them."
[975] Book: The Septuagint as Christian Scripture. By Martin Hengel. T&T Clark,
2002.
Pages 106-107 supply a list of 239 "literal citations" from the Old Testament
found in the New Testament "introduced with a formula" that makes it clear
Scripture is being quoted.
An example of such a formula appears in Mark 15:28, which states: "And the
scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the
transgressors."
Page 107: "By contrast, the historical books … [of the Old Testament] recede
noticeably in the New Testament—Chronicles, Ezra, Esther, as well as Canticles
[Song of Songs], Lamentations and Qoheleth [Ecclesiastes] are entirely absent.
The same is true of the extra books in the Christian [Septuagint – i.e.,
Apocrypha]."
Page 111 states that the books of Luke, Matthew, James, and the letters of Paul
indicate a familiarity with the Apocrypha.
Pages 111-112: "But we have no indication that these (and other
'pseudegraphical') books were read essentially as 'Holy Scripture'. In any case,
they were not cited as such. Jude 14, where Enoch [a pseudegraphical, not
apocryphal book] is introduced as a 'prophet', constitutes an exception."
[976] Bible: New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha: New Revised Standard
Version. Edited by Michael D. Coogan. Oxford University Press, 2001. In the
section entitled "Introduction to the Apocrypha," page 9 states:
When a writer imitates prophetic style, as in the book of Baruch, he repeats
with slight modifications the language of the older prophets. But the
introductory phrase, "Thus says the LORD," which occurs so frequently in the
prophetic literature of the Hebrew Bible, is absent from the
Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books.
[977] Article: "Canon of the New Testament." By George J. Reid.
Catholic
Encyclopedia, Volume III. Robert Appleton Company, 1908.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm
The Catholic New Testament, as defined by the Council of Trent, does not differ,
as regards the books contained, from that of all Christian bodies at present.
{The following minor exceptions are noted:} In Syria the Nestorians possess a
Canon almost identical with the final one of the ancient East Syrians; they
exclude the four smaller Catholic Epistles and Apocalypse. The Monophysites
receive all the books. The Armenians have one apocryphal letter to the
Corinthians and two from the same. The Coptic-Arabic Church include with the
canonical Scriptures the Apostolic Constitutions and the Clementine Epistles.
The Ethiopic New Testament also contains the so-called "Apostolic
Constitutions."
[978] Article: "Bible." New Millennium Encyclopedia. Simon & Schuster, 1999.
"The New Testament consists of 27 documents written between AD 50 and 150…."
[979] Life Application Study Bible: New King James Version. General editor:
Bruce B. Barton. Tyndale House Publishers, 1996. First published in 1988.
The "Vital Statistics" section for each book of the Bible provides dates when
written. The earliest book of the New Testament is James, which is dated to 49
A.D. The most recent book is Revelation, which is dated to 95 A.D.
[980] Book: The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. By Bruce M.
Metzger. Abingdon Press, 2003. Third edition. First edition published in 1965.
Page 329 states that the total number of Greek New Testament manuscripts is
5,519.
[981] Book: The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts. Edited
by Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett. Baker Books, 1999. Pages 17-18:
The earliest known New Testament manuscript is P52, a fragment of John's Gospel.
This papyrus fragment was dated by various paleographers to the first half of
the second century—even to the first quarter…. In the end, C. H. Roberts dated
it to "the first half of the second century." This conservative dating allows
for a larger time gap between the autograph [original] and copy, but there is
nothing unreasonable about assigning a date of A.D. 100-125 for
P52.
Page 17:
When any paleographer attempts to redate a New Testament manuscript to the late
first century or early second century, there is immediate opposition because it
is believed that the time lapse between the autograph and the copy is too short.
However, it is not impossible for there to be extant manuscripts dated within
twenty-five to thirty years of the autographs. For example … {the author goes on
to provide 3 such instances}.
Page 357:
P52 can safely be dated to A.D. 100-125. However, its comparability to
manuscripts of an even earlier period (especially P. Berol. 6845) [dated to
around 100 A.D.], pushes the date closer to A.D. 100, plus or minus a few years.
This is extremely remarkable, especially if we accept the consensus dating for
the composition of the Fourth Gospel; A.D. 80-85. This would mean that
P52 is
only twenty years removed from the original.
[982] Article: "Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004. The section entitled "The fourth Gospel: The Gospel According to
John" states:
Because both external and internal evidence are doubtful, a working hypothesis
is that John and the Johannine letters were written and edited somewhere in the
East (perhaps Ephesus) as the product of a "school," or Johannine circle, at the
end of the 1st century. The addressees were Gentile Christians, but there is
accurate knowledge and much reference to Palestine, which might be a reflection
of early Gospel tradition. The Jews are equated with the opponents of Jesus, and
the separation of church and synagogue is complete, also pointing to a
late-1st-century dating.
[983] Book: The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts. Edited
by Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett. Baker Books, 1999. Page 13:
This book provides transcriptions of sixty of the earliest New Testament
manuscripts, dated from the early second century to the beginning of the fourth
(A.D. 100-300). … These early manuscripts, containing about two-thirds of the
New Testament text, were discovered (most in the twentieth century), disbursed
to various museums throughout the world, and subsequently published….
[984] Book: The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and
Restoration. By Bruce M. Metzger. Oxford University Press, 1992. Third edition.
First edition published in 1964. Page 86:
Besides textual evidence derived from New Testament Greek manuscripts and from
early versions, the textual critic has available the numerous scriptural
quotations included in the commentaries, sermons, and other treatises written by
early Church Fathers. Indeed, so extensive are these citations that if all other
sources for our knowledge of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they
would be sufficient alone for the reconstruction of practically the entire New
Testament.
Page 88: "The following is a list of several of the more important Church
Fathers whose writings contain numerous quotations from the New Testament."
NOTE: Pages 88-89 list 30 people, the earliest being Justin Martyr (died around
165 A.D.), Marcion (flourished around 150-160 A.D.), and Tatian, (flourished
around 170 A.D.).]
[985] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875. Pages 182-183:
These writings [the Scriptures] were not simply succeeded by a literature of a
similar cast; but they actually created a vast body of literature, altogether
devoted to their elucidation; and this elucidation took every imaginable form of
occasional comment on a single passage—of argument upon certain topics,
requiring numerous scattered quotations, and of complete annotation, in which
nearly the whole of the original author is repeated. From the Rabbinical
paraphrases, and from the works of the Christian writers of the first seven
centuries (to come later is unnecessary) the whole text of the Scriptures might
have been recovered if the original had since perished.
If any one is so uninformed as to suppose that this kind of evidence is open to
uncertainty, or that it admits of refutation, let him … open the volumes of
writers of all classes since the days of Elizabeth, and see how many allusions
to Shakespeare … he can find; and then ask himself if there remains the
possibility of doubting that these dramas … were in existence at the accession
of James I.
[986] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875.
Page 184: "The New Testament has been conveyed to modern times, in whole or in
part, in the Peshito or Syriac translation, in the Coptic, in several Arabic
versions, in the Ethiopic, the Armenian, the Persian, the Gothic, and the old
Latin versions."
[987] Book: The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. By Bruce M.
Metzger. Abingdon Press, 2003. Third edition. First edition published in 1965.
Page 331: "By A.D. 600, the Gospels, as well as several other books of the
Bible, had been rendered into Latin, Syriac, Coptic (several dialects), Gothic,
Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic, Nubian, and Sogdian."
[988] Life Application Study Bible: New King James Version. General editor:
Bruce B. Barton. Tyndale House Publishers, 1996. First published in 1988.
The Preface states: "Over 5,000 Greek, eight thousand Latin, and many more
manuscripts in other languages attest to the integrity of the New Testament."
[989] Book: History of the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times
together with the Process of Historical Proof. By Isaac Taylor. Haskell House,
1971. First published in 1875. Page 172:
If in the case of a classic author, twenty manuscripts, or even five, are deemed
amply sufficient (and sometimes one, as we have seen, is relied upon), it is
evident that many hundreds [of New Testament manuscripts] are redundant for the
purposes of argument. The importance of so great a number of copies consists in
the amplitude of the means which are thereby afforded of restoring the text to
its pristine purity; for the various readings collected from so many sources, if
they do not always place the true reading beyond doubt, afford an absolute
security against extensive corruptions.
[990] Book: The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. By Bruce M.
Metzger. Abingdon Press, 2003. Third edition. First edition published in 1965.
Page 327:
It should be mentioned that, though there are thousands of divergences of
wording among the manuscripts of the Bible (more in the New Testament than in
the Old), the overwhelming majority of such variant readings involve
inconsequential details, such as alternative spellings, order of words, and
interchange of synonyms. In these cases, as well as in the relatively few
instances involving the substance of the record, scholars apply the techniques
of textual criticism in order to determine with more or less probability what
the original wording was. In any event, no doctrine of the Christian faith
depends solely upon a passage that is textually uncertain.
[991] Article: "Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004. The section entitled "The physical aspects of New Testament texts"
states:
Compared with other ancient manuscripts, the text of the New Testament is
dependable and consistent, but on an absolute scale there are far more variant
readings as compared with those of, for example, classical Greek authors. This
is the result, on the one hand, of a great number of surviving manuscripts and
extant manuscript fragments and, on the other, of the fact that the time gap
between an oral phase of transmission and the written stage was far shorter than
that of many other ancient Greek manuscripts.
[992] Life Application Study Bible: New King James Version. General editor:
Bruce B. Barton. Tyndale House Publishers, 1996. First published in 1988. The
Preface states:
There is more manuscript support for the New Testament than for any other body
of ancient literature. … There is only one basic New Testament used by
Protestants, Roman Catholics, and [Greek] Orthodox. Minor variations in hand
copying have appeared through the centuries, before mechanical printing began
about A.D. 1450.
Some variations exist in the spelling of the Greek words, in word order, and in
similar details. These ordinarily do not show up in translation and do not
affect the sense of the text in any way.
Other manuscript differences, regarding the omission or inclusion of a word or a
clause, as well as two paragraphs in the Gospels, should not overshadow the
overwhelming degree of agreement which exists among the ancient records. Bible
readers may be assured that that the most important differences in English New
Testaments of today, are due not to manuscript divergence, but to the way in
which translators view the task of translation.
[993] Book: The Canon of Scripture. By F.F. Bruce. InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Pages 288-289 list citations that are questionable from a textual evidence
standpoint: 1 John 5:7, Mark 16:9-20, John 7:53-8:11. This book states that some
of these passages are spurious. I don't think the manuscript evidence allows one
to make such a determination.
[994] Book: The Canon of Scripture. By F.F. Bruce. InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Pages 117-251 examine in detail all of the early Christian writings that contain
lists of Scriptures.
Pages 208-209:
As we have seen, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, devoted most of his
thirty-ninth festal letter, announcing the date of Easter in 367, to a statement
about the canon of scripture and its limits. … Athanasius is the first writer
known to us who listed exactly the twenty-seven books which traditionally make
up the New Testament in catholic and orthodox Christianity, without making any
distinction of status among them.
Pages 230-231:
Augustine, like Jerome, inherited the canon of scripture as something 'given'.
It was a part of the Christian faith which he embraced at his conversion in
386…. While he received the twenty-seven books as they had been delivered to
him, Augustine, like other Christian thinkers, considered the question: Why
these, and no others? He prefaces his list of canonical [Biblical] books with
these observations:
Among the canonical scriptures he (the interpreter of the sacred writings) will
judge according to the following standard: to prefer those that are received by
all the catholic churches to those which some do not receive. Again, among those
which are not received by all, he will prefer such as are sanctioned by the
greater number of churches and by those of greater authority to such as held by
the smaller number and by those of less authority. If, however, he finds that
some books are held by the greater number of churches, and others by the
churches of greater authority (although this is not a very likely thing to
happen), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is to be
considered as equal.
It is plain from this that, when Augustine wrote, no ecclesiastical council had
made a pronouncement on the canon which could be recognized as the voice of the
church.
Page 250: "That the New Testament consists of the twenty-seven books which have
been recognized as belonging to it since the fourth century is not a value
judgment; it is a statement of fact."
[995] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003.
Page 222: "Recent scholarship inclines to the older view that the collection of
the four gospels with canonical status existed by the mid-second century at the
latest."
[996] Book: The Canon of Scripture. By F.F. Bruce. InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Pages 255-269 provide a good overview of criteria proposed for inclusion. Pages
256-257:
Similarly, the recipients of the letter to the Hebrews no doubt were well
acquainted with its author (in that sense they would not have regarded it as an
anonymous communication), but since it does not bear his name, his identity was
forgotten after a generation or two, and has never been certainly recovered.
[997] Book: The Canon of Scripture. By F.F. Bruce. InterVarsity Press, 1988.
This book provides a well-researched account of how the books of the Bible came
to be assembled. Near the end of the book, page 282 states:
Certainly, as one looks back on the process of canonization in the early
Christian centuries, and remembers some of the ideas of which certain church
writers of that period were capable, it is easy to conclude that in reaching a
conclusion on the limits of the canon they were directed by a wisdom higher than
their own."
Page 283: "By an act of faith the Christian reader today may identify the New
Testament, as it has been received, with the entire 'tradition of Christ'. But
confidence in such an act of faith will be strengthened if the same faith proves
to have been exercised by Christians in other places and at other times—if it is
in line with the traditional 'criteria of canonicity'."
[998] Transcript: "Today Show" (with Matt Lauer). NBC News, July 9, 2003.
LAUER: "Let me be more specific, OK? It's not only number one on the New York
Times best seller list, it is number one on every best seller list in the
country right now."
Mr. BROWN: "That is true."
[999] Book review: "A tale of religious secrets and revelations." By Dick Adler.
Chicago Tribune, April 13, 2003.
A thundering, tantalizing, extremely smart fun ride. Brown doesn't slow down his
tremendously powerful narrative engine despite transmitting several doctorates'
worth of fascinating history and learned speculation. "The Da Vinci Code" is
brain candy of the highest quality -- which is a reviewer's code meaning, ''Put
this on top of your pile.''
[1000] Article: "Constantine I." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
"Constantine was born probably in the later AD 280s. … [H]e died in 337."
[1001] Ancient Work: The First Apology. By Justin Martyr. Edited by Alexander
Roberts and James Donaldson. The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885.
NOTE: This work can be dated by the fact that it begins with the following
words: "To the Emperor Titus Aelius Adrianus Antoninus Pius Augustus Caesar…."
This individual reigned from 138 to 161 A.D. [Article: Antoninus Pius.
Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.]
[1002] Ancient Work: The First Apology. By Justin Martyr. Edited by Alexander
Roberts and James Donaldson. The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885.
Chapter 67:
And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather
together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the
prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased,
the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good
things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our
prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like
manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the
people assent, saying Amen….
[1003] Article: "Sunday." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.
"The practice of Christians gathering together for worship on Sunday dates back
to apostolic times, but details of the actual development of the custom are not
clear."
[1004] Book: The Da Vinci Hoax. By Carl E. Olson & Sandra Miesel. Ignatius
Press, 2004. Pages 159-161.
[1005] Article: "Sunday." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.
The emperor Constantine (died 337), a convert to Christianity, introduced the
first civil legislation concerning Sunday in 321, when he decreed that all work
should cease on Sunday, except that farmers could work if necessary. This law,
aimed at providing time for worship, was followed later in the same century and
in subsequent centuries by further restrictions on Sunday activities.
[1006] Ancient Work: The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine. By Eusebius
Pamphili. Published about 338 A.D. Translated by Ernest Cushing Richardson in
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2, Volume 1. Book 4, Chapter 18, Section
1.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iv.vi.iv.xviii.html
The same observance was recommended by this blessed prince [Constantine] to all
classes of his subjects: his earnest desire being gradually to lead all mankind
to the worship of God. Accordingly he enjoined on all the subjects of the Roman
empire to observe the Lord's day, as a day of rest, and also to honor the day
which precedes the Sabbath [Friday]; in memory, I suppose, of what the Savior of
mankind is recorded to have achieved on that day. And since his desire was to
teach his whole army zealously to honor the Savior's day (which derives its name
from light, and from the sun), he freely granted to those among them who were
partakers of the divine faith, leisure for attendance on the services of the
Church of God, in order that they might be able, without impediment, to perform
their religious worship.
[1007] Article: "Nicaea, Council of." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
[1008] Ancient Work: The First Apology. By Justin Martyr. Edited by Alexander
Roberts and James Donaldson. The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885.
NOTE: This work can be dated by the fact that it begins with the following
words: "To the Emperor Titus Aelius Adrianus Antoninus Pius Augustus Caesar…."
This person reigned from 138 to 161 A.D. [Article: Antoninus Pius. Encyclopædia
Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.]
[1009] Ancient Work: The First Apology. By Justin Martyr. Edited by Alexander
Roberts and James Donaldson. The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885.
Chapter 31.
[1010] Ancient Work: Letters and Panegyricus. By Gaius Plinius Caecilius
Secundus. Translated by Betty Radice. Harvard University Press, 1969.
In Volume I, page xii states that Pliny "was chosen by Trajan to go out as the
emperor's special representative … to the province of Bithynia-Pontus."
Page xiv states that Pliny arrived in Bithynia "in time for Trajan's birthday
celebrations on 18 September in a year which could be 109, 100, or 111, and as
there is no mention of similar celebrations for the start of his third year we
assume that he died before then…."
In Volume II, pages 285 to 291 contain the letter from Pliny to Trajan on the
subject of Christianity. It is identified by the callout, Book 10, Letter 96.
Page 289:
Others, whose names were given to me by an informer, first admitted the charge
and then denied it; they said that they had ceased to be Christians two or more
years previously…. They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error
amounted to no more than this: they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day
to chant verses alternately among themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god,
and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purposes, but to
abstain from theft, robbery and adultery….
NOTE: The description of Christianity as a "cult" is on page 291.
[1011] Article: "Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate
Reference Suite 2004.
The section entitled "Gospel According to Mark" states: "Mark may thus be dated
somewhere after 64 and before 70, when the Jewish war ended."
The section entitled "Gospel According to Matthew" states: "The fall of
Jerusalem (AD 70) had occurred, and this dates Matthew later than Mark, c.
70–80."
The section entitled "Gospel According to Luke" states: "Luke can be dated c.
80."
The section entitled "Gospel According to John" states that "a working
hypothesis is that John and the Johannine letters were written and edited
somewhere in the East … at the end of the 1st century. … The Jews are equated
with the opponents of Jesus, and the separation of church and synagogue is
complete, also pointing to a late-1st-century dating."
[1012] This range of dates is based upon a spectrum of academic publications I
have read. Given the date of the earliest manuscript of John (100-125 A.D.) [see
citation
981], some scholars truly stretch the limits of plausibility in dating
this book to the early second century.
[1013] Book: The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts. Edited
by Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett. Baker Books, 1999.
Below are some of the 60 manuscripts examined in this book.
| Callout |
Dating |
Contents |
Page |
| P4, P64, P67 (all are probably from the same manuscript) |
125-150 |
Luke 1:58-59, 1:62-2:1, 2:6-7, 3:8-4:2, 4:29-32, 4:34-35, 5:3-8, 5:30-6:16 Matthew: 26:7-8, 26:10, 26:14-15, 26: 22-23, 26:31-33
Mark 3:9, 5:20-22, 5:25-28 |
33 |
| P45 |
175-225 |
Many portions of Matthew, Mark, John, Luke, and Acts (37 pages of text in total) |
145 |
| P46 |
125-150 |
Many portions of Romans, Hebrews, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians (125 pages of text in total) |
193 |
| P52 |
100-125 |
John 18:31-33, 37-38 |
355 |
| P66 |
150 |
John 1:1-6:11, 6:35-14:26, 14:29-30, 15:2-26, 16:2-4, 16:6-7, 16:10-20:20, 16:22-23, 20:25-21:9, 20:12, 20:17 |
366 |
| P104 |
100-150 |
Matthew 21:34-37, 21:43, 21:45(?) |
627 |
NOTE: Although none of these manuscripts contain the entire text of each Gospel,
many passages that pertain to Jesus' divinity are present in them.
[1014] Article: "Nero." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.
"The great fire that ravaged Rome in 64 illustrates how low Nero's reputation
had sunk by this time. … According to the Annals of the Roman historian Tacitus
and to the Nero of the Roman biographer Suetonius, Nero in response tried to
shift responsibility for the fire on the Christians…."
[1015] Ancient Work: The Annals. By Cornelius Tacitus. Published 115-117 A.D.
Translated by Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb. Macmillan, 1891.
Section 15.44.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?...
[1016] Same as above:
Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during
the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus,
and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke
out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where
all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center
and become popular.
[1017] Article: "Origen." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.
This article states that Origen was "the most important theologian and biblical
scholar of the early Greek church."
[1018] Ancient Work: Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. By Origen Adamantius.
Published about 250 A.D. Translated by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson.
The opening paragraph of this work states:
Concerning the four Gospels which alone are uncontroverted in the Church of God
under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the Gospel according to Matthew,
who was at one time a publican and afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, was
written first; and that he composed it in the Hebrew tongue and published it for
the converts from Judaism. The second written was that according to Mark, who
wrote it according to the instruction of Peter, who, in his General Epistle,
acknowledged him as a son, saying, "The church that is in Babylon, elect
together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Mark my son." And third, was that
according to Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul, which he composed for the
converts from the Gentiles. Last of all, that according to John.
[1019] Book: The Canon of Scripture. By F.F. Bruce. InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Pages 117-251 examine in detail all of the early Christian writings that contain
lists of Scriptures.
[1020] Article: "Dead Sea Scrolls." New Millennium Encyclopedia. Simon &
Schuster, 1999.
The many links between the thought and idiom of the scrolls and of the New
Testament are of special interest. Both emphasize the imminence of the kingdom
of God, the need for immediate repentance, and the expected discomfiture of
Belial, the Evil One. Similar references occur in both to baptism in the Holy
Spirit, and similar characterizations are found of the faithful as "the elect"
and the "children of light"; for biblical references, see, for example, Titus
1:1, 1 Pet. 1:2, Eph. 5:8. These parallels are the more arresting because the
Qumran brotherhood lived at the same time and in the same area as John the
Baptist, who was himself a harbinger of subsequent Christian ideas. Although
they contain several ideas that are suggestive of Christian theology, however,
the Dead Sea Scrolls offer no parallels to such distinctive Christian doctrines
as incarnate godhead, vicarious atonement, and redemption through the cross.
[1021] Book: The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. By Geza Vermes. Penguin
Press, 1997. Seventh edition. First published in 1962. Pages 21-22:
Since Qumran and Christianity partly overlap, it is not surprising that from the
very beginning of the Dead Sea Scrolls research some scholars endeavoured to
identify the two. … In my opinion all these theories fail the basic credibility
test: they do not spring from, but are foisted on, the texts. These – to say the
least – improbable speculations - as well as the no less fantastic claim that
Qumran Cave 7 yielded remains of the Gospel of Mark and other New Testament
writings in Greek need not detain us any longer.
[1022] Book Review: "The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christian Myth by John M.
Allegro." Reviewed by John J. Collins. Biblical Archaeology Review, July/Aug
1986.
John Allegro … is notorious as one of the most irresponsible of the
sensationalists who have tried to popularize unfounded, would-be shocking
theories about the scrolls. … The scrolls refer in several places to a figure
called the "Teacher of Righteousness," who played a formative role in the early
history of the community. Allegro wants to claim that this figure was the real
historical Jesus. His arguments are of the flimsiest kind.
NOTE: The article goes on to detail these arguments and point out the inanity of
them.
[1023] Book: The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English. By Geza Vermes. Penguin
Press, 1997.
Pages 1-2 state that the original find was made by a "young Bedouin shepherd"
somewhere between the winter of 1946 and the summer of 1947.
Page 2: "Between 1951 and 1956, ten further caves were discovered…."
[1024] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003. Page 105:
In December 1945, an Egyptian farm worker in search of fertile humus near Nag
Hammadi in Upper Egypt discovered a clay jar containing thirteen leather-bound
codices with texts in the Coptic language (as the name itself indicates, Coptic
is a late form of Egyptian). … The thirteen codices … contain about 50 texts,
mostly of a Christian Gnostic character.
[1025] Book: Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7. Edited by Bentley Layton. Volume 1.
Brill, 1989. Translation and commentary on the Gospel of Philip by Wesley
Isenberg.
Page 132: "The [Gospel of Philip] is not a gospel in the usual sense; rather, it
is a collection of theological statements concerning sacraments and ethics.
Aside from certain sections where some continuity is effected … the line of
thought is rambling and disjointed. … [It] contains only fifteen sayings of
Jesus…."
[1026] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003. Page 106:
One general problem posed by the identification of literary genres becomes
particularly acute in the case of the Nag Hammadi texts: the name an author
gives his text is not identical with others' description of it. In other words,
writings in the Nag Hammadi corpus called 'gospels' are not necessarily what we
understand as a 'gospel', since we find no narrative elements, and these texts
do not treat the public ministry and passion [crucifixion] of Jesus Christ.
Page 123: "The contents of [the Gospel of Philip are] … even further from our
usual idea of 'a gospel'. Only a few logia [sayings] of Jesus are presented in
direct speech … and there are virtually no addressees to the disciples."
[1027] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003.
Page 105: "The [Nag Hammadi] codices were produced c. [about] 350, as we see
from dated receipts and contracts which were torn into strips and used to
strengthen the bindings…."
Page 124 states that the Gospel of Philip "survives in only one Coptic
manuscript."
[1028] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003.
Page 124: "Some theological statements in [the Gospel of Philip] elaborate
elements of the Valentinian gnosis, named after Valentinus (himself no
'Valentinian') who taught in Rome between c. [about] 138 and 158. This means
that [the Gospel of Philip] cannot be earlier than the last years of the second
century; the date of composition may in fact lie in the third century."
[1029] Book: Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7. Edited by Bentley Layton. Volume 1.
Brill, 1989. Translation and commentary on the Gospel of Philip by Wesley
Isenberg. Page 135:
The original work, from which the Coptic was translated, was presumably composed
in Greek. However, Syria is the probable place of composition, for various
reasons, including interest shown in Syriac words (63:21-23, 56:7-9), affinities
to Eastern sacramental practice and catecheses [teachings], and espousal of
encratite ethics [abstaining from marriage, wine, or animal food]. A date in the
second half of (134) the third century would suit the many parallels to Gnostic
and Christian literature.
[1030] Book: Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7. Edited by Bentley Layton. Volume 1.
Brill, 1989. Translation and commentary on the Gospel of Philip by Wesley
Isenberg.
Page 132 states the Gospel of Philip "contains only fifteen sayings of Jesus:
seven are citations of Jesus' words already found in the canonical [New
Testament] gospels…."
[1031] Book: Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7. Edited by Bentley Layton. Volume 1.
Brill, 1989. Translation and commentary on the Gospel of Philip by Wesley
Isenberg. Page 209 (quoting the Gospel of Phillip):
That is why the word says, "Already the ax is laid at the root of the trees."
{Compare with Matthew 3:10: "And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the
trees."}
The word said, "If you know the truth, the truth will make you free." {Compare
with John 8:32: "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you
free."}
[1032] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003. Page 134:
Its [the Gospel of Philip's] use of the New Testament writings, including the
Gospel of John and the letters of Paul, is so obvious that it is impossible to
maintain the hypothesis of an independent tradition, and no one attempts to date
it even as early as the beginning of the second century. [The Gospel of Philip]
is not an independent witness to the tradition about Jesus.
[1033] Book: The Nag Hammadi Library in English. Brill, 1977.
Pages 471-474 contain a commentary and translation of the Gospel of Mary by
George W. McRae and R. McL. Wilson. Page 471 notes that the text we have "opens
with a familiar scene in Gnostic literature: the resurrected Christ in dialogue
with his disciples." This setting is evidenced by the following passages on page
472:
When the blessed one had said this, he greeted them all saying, "Peace be with
you. … Go then and preach the Gospel of the kingdom." When he had said this he
departed. But they were grieved. They wept greatly, saying, How shall we go to
the Gentiles and preach the gospel of the kingdom of the Son of Man? If they did
not spare him, how will they spare us?"
And Mary began to speak to them these words: "I," she said, "I saw the Lord in a
vision and I said to him, 'Lord, I saw you today in a vision.' He answered and
said to me, 'Blessed are you, that you did not waver at the sight of me.'"
[1034] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003. Page 161:
Although the first pages of [the Gospel of Mary] are lost, we can reconstruct
the scene which must have been set at the beginning: it is clear that the
dialogue takes place after Easter. The risen Lord – never called 'Jesus', but
always 'Redeemer' or 'Lord', occasionally 'the blessed one' – appears to his
male and female disciples and replies to their questions.
[1035] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003. Page 160:
The Coptic Text of [the Gospel of Mary] is in a fragmentary state: pp. [pages]
1-6 and 11-14 of the codex [book] are missing. What remains is less than half of
the original work. Unfortunately, the discovery of two papyri with sections from
[the Gospel of Mary] in Greek have not supplied any missing passages, since
these papyri, from two different codices, contain only texts already known from
the Coptic translation…. The Coptic codex was written in the fifth century,
while the two papyri are from the third century, PRyl 463 [one of the papyri]
may date from the beginning of the third century. This brings us to a
second-century date for the composition of [the Gospel of Mary]. The content
points to a date in the second half of the century. An early date between 100
and 150 has been proposed by some scholars, but is not convincing.
[1036] Book: The Nag Hammadi Library in English. Brill, 1977. Pages 471-474
contain a commentary and translation of the Gospel of Mary by George W. McRae
and R. McL. Wilson.
Page 471 states that "the date of composition is unknown." From the notes in the
text, it can be seen that the manuscript originally consisted of 19 pages, but
pages 1-6 and 11-14 are lost.
NOTE: Using size 12 font, the translated text of the manuscript fills 3 pages of
a Word document.
[1037] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003.
Page 129 quotes this passage and adds: "The irony is terribly clear: without
realizing what he was doing, Jesus' earthly father himself cultivated the wood
and fashioned the cross on which his son hung."
[1038] The Book of Acts is a continuation of the Gospel of the Luke and is
addressed to the same person. This is evidenced by the content of Luke and Acts
– especially their openings:
Luke 1:1-4:
Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of
those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered
them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the
word; It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things
from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been
instructed.
Acts 1:1-3:
The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to
do and teach, Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through
the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: To
whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs,
being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the
kingdom of God….
[1039] Book: The Nag Hammadi Library in English. Translated by the members of
The Coptic Gnostic Library Project of the Institute for Antiquity and
Christianity. Edited by Marvin W. Meyer. Brill, 1977.
The 8 works referred to are: The First Apocalypse of James (page 242), The
Second Apocalypse of James (249), The Apocryphon of John (98), The Letter of
Peter to Philip (394), The Book of Thomas the Contender (188), The Apocryphon of
James (29), The Sophia of Jesus Christ (206), and The Acts of Peter and the
Twelve Apostles (265).
[1040] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003. Page 222-223:
We see at once that the apocrypha – both the fragments and the texts transmitted
in full – like to take the beginning and the close of the [New Testament] gospel
narratives (the childhood of Jesus and his passion and resurrection) as their
own starting-points. And it is at these borders of the gospel narratives that
the apocrypha find the supporting characters whose biographies they then fill
out.
Walter Bauer's observations about the motives that led to the creation of such
'amplifying' apocrypha have lost nothing of their validity: 'a pious yearning to
know more, a naïve curiosity, delightful in colourful pictures and folktales….'
We need only add that such motifs take hold of other life-stories too – those of
Mary his mother, of Joseph his father, of John the Baptist and Joseph
Arimathaea, of Nicodemus, Bartholomew/Nathanael, Pilate and may others. This
curiosity and yearning for more information did not suddenly come to a halt at
the end of the patristic period. New apocrypha were composed throughout the
entire middle ages….
[1041] Book: The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. By Bruce M.
Metzger. Abingdon Press, 2003. Third edition. First edition published in 1965.
Page 122:
The chief appraisal that the historian can make about these and similar stories
is that the apocryphal gospels presuppose the existence of the four [New
Testament] Gospels. Such stories tell us more about the interests and mentality
of the unknown Christians whose active imagination drew up such texts as they do
about Jesus himself. Sometimes apocryphal gospels are referred to as "excluded
books of the Bible." Even a casual acquaintance, however, of these gospels and
their credentials will convince the reader that no one excluded them from the
Bible; they excluded themselves.
[1042] Book: The Apocryphal Gospels: An Introduction. By Hans-Josef Klauck.
Translated by Brian McNeil. T & T Clark International, 2003.
Page 124: "The [Gospel of Philip], which survives in only one Coptic manuscript,
was originally composed in Greek. It is however possible that the work was
written in Syria, since a number of passages display a striking interest in
etymologies that make sense only in Syriac."
Page 129: "And the companion [koinōnos] of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene."
Page 105 states that "Coptic is a late form of Egyptian."
[1043] Article: "Syriac Language." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
Semitic language belonging to the Northern Central, or Northwestern, group; it
was an important Christian literary and liturgical language from the 3rd through
the 7th century AD. Syriac was based on the East Aramaic dialect of Edessa,
Osroëne (present-day Şanlıurfa, in southeastern Turkey), which became one of the
chief centres of Christianity in the Middle East at the end of the 2nd century.
[1044] Article: "Aramaic Language." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
"Semitic language of the Northern Central, or Northwestern, group that was
originally spoken by the ancient Middle Eastern people known as Aramaeans. It
was most closely related to Hebrew, Syriac, and Phoenician and was written in a
script derived from the Phoenician alphabet."
[1045] Book: The Woman Jesus Loved: Mary Magdalene in the Nag Hammadi Library
and Related Documents. By Antti Marjanen. Brill, 1996.
Page 151: "Difficulty in interpreting this word is complicated by the fact that
the Greek word κοινωνός may assume a wide range of meanings. … a marriage
partner … a companion in faith … a co-worker in proclaiming the gospel … or a
business associate…."
[1046] Book: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early
Christian Literature. Revised and edited by Frederick William Danker. University
of Chicago Press, 2000. Third edition.
On page 553, the entry for κοινωνός states: "one who takes part in something
with someone, companion, partner, sharer. … partners (in business) … Of a martyr
(who shares a bloody death with Christ) … a partner in adultery…."
[1047] Book: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early
Christian Literature. Revised and edited by Frederick William Danker. University
of Chicago Press, 2000. Third edition.
On page 552, the entry for κοινωνία states: "[C]lose association involving
mutual interest and sharing, association, communion, fellowship,
close
relationship (hence a favorite expression for the marital relationship as the
most intimate between human beings…)."
[1048] Book: Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7. Edited by Bentley Layton. Volume 1.
Brill, 1989. Translation and commentary on the Gospel of Philip by Wesley
Isenberg.
Page 159: "There were three who always walked with the lord: Mary his mother and
her sister and the Magdalene, the one who was called his companion."
[1049] Book: The Woman Jesus Loved: Mary Magdalene in the Nag Hammadi Library
and Related Documents. By Antti Marjanen. Brill, 1996.
Page 154: "The most decisive argument against the assumption that the primary
meaning of koinwnoc as "wife" is the fact that in all the other instances where
the Gospel of Philip speaks about someone's wife it uses the usual word Chime
(65, 20; 70,19; 76,7; 82,1)."
Page 159 states that "although the author [of the Gospel of Philip] regarded
Mary Magdalene as the partner of the earthly Jesus, it is very unlikely that
their consortium was viewed in terms of a sexual relationship."
[1050] Book: Nag Hammadi Codex II, 2-7. Edited by Bentley Layton. Volume 1.
Brill, 1989. Translation and commentary on the Gospel of Philip by Wesley
Isenberg. Page 138:
The [Gospel of Philip] is known from a single copy, which is for the most part
free of errors. Both the beginning and the end of the text are clearly marked
and no pages are missing. But every one of the thirty-six pages is damaged to
some extent. The top of each page is generally intact, though usually a part of
the first line is lost or illegible. The bottom outer corner of most pages,
however has been damaged. The extent of the damage varies, the most severely
affected passages occurring on pages 67-75, where the bottom nine lines are
substantially lost. Conjectural restoration of the original text in such
passages is very uncertain.
NOTE: The translation in this book uses the same pagination as the manuscript.
Thus, we can see where the text is positioned on the pages. The sentence quotes
above sits at the top of page 14 in the manuscript, which is page 169 in this
book. The footnotes on this page read:
kiss or greet. Although kiss may be correct, the Coptic construction found here
is not normally used in this sense.
on her [. . .]: possibly, on her [mouth]; or, on her [feet]; or, on her [cheek];
or on her [forehead]
[1051] Ancient Manuscript: "PSI XIV 1390 fr. C (detail)." This manuscript dates
to the second century A.D. and displays text from the Greek poet Euphorion, who
was born about 275 B.C. Used with permission of the Istituto Papirologico
"G.Vitelli."
[1052] Transcript: "Today Show" (with Matt Lauer). NBC News, July 9, 2003.
LAUER: How much of this is based on reality in terms of things that
actually occurred? I know you did a lot of research for the book.
Mr. BROWN: Absolutely all of it. Obviously, there are--Robert Langdon
is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret
societies, all of that is historical fact.
LAUER: So what'd you do? You traveled the world, you know, running into
museums and--and...
Mr. BROWN: Essentially, yeah.
LAUER: … interviewing a lot of historians.
[1053] Book review: "A tale of religious secrets and revelations." By Dick
Adler. Chicago Tribune, April 13, 2003.
A thundering, tantalizing, extremely smart fun ride. Brown doesn't slow down his
tremendously powerful narrative engine despite transmitting several doctorates'
worth of fascinating history and learned speculation. "The Da Vinci Code" is
brain candy of the highest quality -- which is a reviewer's code meaning, "Put
this on top of your pile."
[1054] Although average lifespans were much shorter in ancient times due to
factors such as high infant mortality rates, the ravages of war, and the absence
of modern medical care,* people who had peaceful and healthy lives sometimes
survived to great ages. Recounting a census conducted in 74 A.D., the Roman
Historian Pliny the Elder noted there were 82 people "in the eighth region of
Italy" between the ages of 100 and 140 years old. Given a date for the
crucifixion of 33 A.D.‡ and the dates provided in the Encyclopædia Britannica
for the four Gospels,§ a person who was 20-years-old at the crucifixion would
have been no more than 57 years-old when the Book of Mark was completed, no more
than 67 years old when the Books of Matthew and Luke were completed, and no more
than 87-years-old when the Book of John was completed.
NOTES:
* Book: Roman Social History: A Sourcebook. By Tim G. Parkin and Arthur J.
Pomeroy. Routledge, 2007. Page 44:
The most striking feature regarding Roman mortality is how high its rate was
from an early age….
Such high mortality may be attributed to a combination of low levels of hygiene
and sanitation (particularly in urbanized areas) and of low standards of medical
care, as well as poor nutrition for poorer people. We hear much of the ancient
sources of food shortages, epidemics (infectious diseases must have taken a
severe toll), and war….
† Ancient Work: The Natural History. By Pliny the Elder. The first ten books of
this work were published around 77 AD. Translated by John Bostock & H.T. Riley.
Taylor and Francis, 1855. Book 7, Chapter 50.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text.jsp?doc=...
First of all, however, it must strike us that the variations which have taken
place in this science prove its uncertainty; and to this consideration may be
added the experience of the very last census, which was made four years ago,
under the direction of the Emperors Vespasian, father and son.8 … [I]n the
eighth region of Italy, there appeared by the register, to be fifty-four persons
of one hundred years of age, fourteen of one hundred and ten, two of one hundred
and twenty-five, four of one hundred and thirty, the same number of one hundred
and thirty-five to one hundred and thirty-seven, and three of one hundred and
forty. …
8 This census appears to have taken place A.D. 74, under the fifth consulship of
Vespasian, and the third of Titus; according to Censorinus, it was the last of
which we have any distinct account.—B.
‡ As documented in Chapter 1 of Rational Conclusions.
§ Article: "Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference
Suite 2004.
The section entitled "Gospel According to Mark" states: "Mark may thus be dated
somewhere after 64 and before 70, when the Jewish war ended."
The section entitled "Gospel According to Matthew" states: "The fall of
Jerusalem (AD 70) had occurred, and this dates Matthew later than Mark, c.
70–80."
The section entitled "Gospel According to Luke" states: "Luke can be dated c.
80."
The section entitled "Gospel According to John" states that "a working
hypothesis is that John and the Johannine letters were written and edited
somewhere in the East … at the end of the 1st century. … The Jews are equated
with the opponents of Jesus, and the separation of church and synagogue is
complete, also pointing to a late-1st-century dating."
[1055] Article: "Nero." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004.
"The great fire that ravaged Rome in 64 illustrates how low Nero's reputation
had sunk by this time. … According to the Annals of the Roman historian Tacitus
and to the Nero of the Roman biographer Suetonius, Nero in response tried to
shift responsibility for the fire on the Christians…."
[1056] Ancient Work: The Annals. By Cornelius Tacitus. Published 115-117 A.D.
Translated by Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb. Macmillan, 1891.
Section 15.44.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=...
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted
the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called
Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin,
suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of
our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus
checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of
the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every
part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest
was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an
immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as
of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths.
Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were
nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly
illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the
spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the
people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for
criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling
of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut
one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed.
|