04-23-2013, 06:46 AM
Shlama akhi Paul,
of course I cannot support corrupted Greek text.
Concerning the recensions, so they always until present time are engaged
in critical corrections and collations with different manuscripts thinking that they refine the text. But through all the history they thought this. Personally, I believe its continuation of corruption of the Greek text.
The most interesting thing is who did these corruptions and what made them do this.
Cause many corruptions are are evidently willful, others are just technical mistakes.
Logically I think this way
1. A translator (copyist) tries to convey his biased understanding in few extra words to make it more clear.
2. A translator (copyist) tries to emphasis his beliefs by adding something thinking it is for good cause.
3. Enemies of Christianity tried to corrupt Christianity by corrupting their texts.
4. Technical mistakes.
5. Critical collations and "refining" of the text which is continuations of corruptions.
I was reading in the past one explanation that heretics tried to distort the text according to their beliefs but the Church of Greece preserved the true and right text. BTW, this text is almost identical to Peshitta.
I know that emperor Constantine was paying money to copyists to promote certain version.
Besides Greek manuscripts we have Peshitta/Peshitto differences. Personally reading and collating about two short books I found many differences. And I feel very sorry for Stephen that in his Khaboris project he filled out the illegible parts with WesternPeshitto 1905 instead of e.g Mingana 148 to have one solid Eastern type text.
of course I cannot support corrupted Greek text.
Quote:The Byzantine, the Egyptian and an independent "Western" text. The rest are copyist errors or variations.I knew about the three families.
Concerning the recensions, so they always until present time are engaged
in critical corrections and collations with different manuscripts thinking that they refine the text. But through all the history they thought this. Personally, I believe its continuation of corruption of the Greek text.
The most interesting thing is who did these corruptions and what made them do this.
Cause many corruptions are are evidently willful, others are just technical mistakes.
Logically I think this way
1. A translator (copyist) tries to convey his biased understanding in few extra words to make it more clear.
2. A translator (copyist) tries to emphasis his beliefs by adding something thinking it is for good cause.
3. Enemies of Christianity tried to corrupt Christianity by corrupting their texts.
4. Technical mistakes.
5. Critical collations and "refining" of the text which is continuations of corruptions.
I was reading in the past one explanation that heretics tried to distort the text according to their beliefs but the Church of Greece preserved the true and right text. BTW, this text is almost identical to Peshitta.
I know that emperor Constantine was paying money to copyists to promote certain version.
Besides Greek manuscripts we have Peshitta/Peshitto differences. Personally reading and collating about two short books I found many differences. And I feel very sorry for Stephen that in his Khaboris project he filled out the illegible parts with WesternPeshitto 1905 instead of e.g Mingana 148 to have one solid Eastern type text.