Debunking another Trimmism

[yuku]

Shlama Akhi Antonio,


You have to realize that ALL existing Peshitta manuscripts agree.

Shlama Akhi Paul,

All the best wishes to you, and to all other members of the forum!

Sorry I've been away all this time. I've been busy with various projects that I had to do.

I've read your discussion with Antonio, and I confess that I'm rather sympathetic to what he's saying. I don't think it's a good idea to reject everything that the professional textual critics have to offer, and all the standard text-critical methodologies.

As you know, I've had many battles of my own with the professional textual critics, and yet I still don't want to reject everything that they say. I still accept many of the standard methods of textual criticism (although not all, of course).

In any case, what you say above is incorrect, sorry. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif" alt="" title="Sad" /><!-- s -->

All existing Peshitta manuscripts don't really agree. There are quite a few variations among them, as Pusey/Gwilliam edition's textual apparatus indicates.

Pusey, Phillip E., and Gwilliam, George H., eds., 1901. Tetraeuangelium sanctum juxta simplicem syrorum versionem ad fidem codicum, massorae, editionum denuo recognitum. Oxford: Clarendon.

Shlama,

Yuri.