11-09-2012, 01:59 AM
:
Shamasha Paul, I'm sorry to hear about the temporary loss of your Father-in-Law, but glad to know he's at rest now, and his trials are completed.
Do you know of anything that is wrong with the Khabouris manuscript, as to its text readings? And does it deviate from the readings of the other older Eastern witnesses that are still extant?
I think The Khabouris is talked about so much, because there seems to be no access to anything else that is in the museums...and there seems to be very little if any work done to bring their readings to the public. We have no idea what they contain as to their text, as a whole, and have to go on a smattering of others who might mention this or that about them. This needs to change please.
I know that the BFBS/UBS critical text, which has all the western readings is said to be constructed from about 70-80 Aramaic manuscripts, but do we know which ones and where each part comes from? Does the British Museum, which looks to have the oldest Eastern Mss tucked away, allow for digital copies to be made? Or maybe they already have made digital copies and might be available?
There is just so little done in this field. If it's true that The Eastern text has very little variations between the Manuscript Texts, then The Khabouris should be a fine example of all the others, which are older than it. Stephen noted that his transcription of a part of The Yonan Codex, which is said to be from the 5th century, was near identical with the Khabouris text in John.
I have recently got hold of the late 1800s, early 1900s English translations of both The Sinai Palimpsest "Old Scratch" and the "Curetonian" version (Aramaic text as well) of the "Evangelion Da-Mepharreshe", which seem to be copies of Bishop Rabbula's separated Gospels which replaced Tatian?s Gospel harmony, which came to be used in the western Syriac churches.
I like the Khabouris text...what's wrong with it? <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->
Shlama,
Chuck
Shamasha Paul, I'm sorry to hear about the temporary loss of your Father-in-Law, but glad to know he's at rest now, and his trials are completed.
Do you know of anything that is wrong with the Khabouris manuscript, as to its text readings? And does it deviate from the readings of the other older Eastern witnesses that are still extant?
I think The Khabouris is talked about so much, because there seems to be no access to anything else that is in the museums...and there seems to be very little if any work done to bring their readings to the public. We have no idea what they contain as to their text, as a whole, and have to go on a smattering of others who might mention this or that about them. This needs to change please.
I know that the BFBS/UBS critical text, which has all the western readings is said to be constructed from about 70-80 Aramaic manuscripts, but do we know which ones and where each part comes from? Does the British Museum, which looks to have the oldest Eastern Mss tucked away, allow for digital copies to be made? Or maybe they already have made digital copies and might be available?
There is just so little done in this field. If it's true that The Eastern text has very little variations between the Manuscript Texts, then The Khabouris should be a fine example of all the others, which are older than it. Stephen noted that his transcription of a part of The Yonan Codex, which is said to be from the 5th century, was near identical with the Khabouris text in John.
I have recently got hold of the late 1800s, early 1900s English translations of both The Sinai Palimpsest "Old Scratch" and the "Curetonian" version (Aramaic text as well) of the "Evangelion Da-Mepharreshe", which seem to be copies of Bishop Rabbula's separated Gospels which replaced Tatian?s Gospel harmony, which came to be used in the western Syriac churches.
I like the Khabouris text...what's wrong with it? <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->Shlama,
Chuck