03-09-2013, 02:46 AM
Shlama akhay,
here's the textual evidence i suppose Murdock was referring to concerning alternate readings for RABBULI:
found this in the trusty ol' "Tetraeuangelium sanctum juxta simplicem Syrorum versionem ad fidem codicum, Massorae, editionum denuo recognitum." i held my breath while i wrote that and almost passed out....
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ia600609.us.archive.org/3/items/tetraeuangeliums00puse/tetraeuangeliums00puse_bw.pdf">http://ia600609.us.archive.org/3/items/ ... use_bw.pdf</a><!-- m -->
take a gander at footnote 16 on page 597. i see RABONI, RABBONI, RABUNI... from different massoretic traditions for Yukhanan 20:16. the masorahs come from the referent JACOBITICUS.
soooo, scribal error is still the concensus, right?
Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
here's the textual evidence i suppose Murdock was referring to concerning alternate readings for RABBULI:
found this in the trusty ol' "Tetraeuangelium sanctum juxta simplicem Syrorum versionem ad fidem codicum, Massorae, editionum denuo recognitum." i held my breath while i wrote that and almost passed out....
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ia600609.us.archive.org/3/items/tetraeuangeliums00puse/tetraeuangeliums00puse_bw.pdf">http://ia600609.us.archive.org/3/items/ ... use_bw.pdf</a><!-- m -->
take a gander at footnote 16 on page 597. i see RABONI, RABBONI, RABUNI... from different massoretic traditions for Yukhanan 20:16. the masorahs come from the referent JACOBITICUS.
soooo, scribal error is still the concensus, right?
Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy