Families of Manuscripts

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Askjo, Sep 1, 2004.

  1. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Families of manuscripts are listed:

    1. The Alexandrian Family

    2. The Western Family

    3. The Caesarean Family

    4. The Traditional Family

    These manuscripts belonging to the same family have the same text. These MVs and the KJV were derived from them. I have lists of these MSS in each family, however I can't tell you too much details on them. I questioned myself concerning these families of MSS.

    Let me ask you 2 questions:

    1. Do you believe in four families of manuscripts?

    2. Who invented four families of manuscripts?
     
  2. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    Good questions, Askjo! [​IMG]

    Askjo: "1. Do you believe in four families of manuscripts?"

    The issue is not a matter of *faith* or *belief* but only of factual data and the interpretation of such.

    Manuscripts are grouped into "families" (or, as more commonly called, "texttypes") because any two manuscripts can be compared and a measurable percentage established regarding the amount of variant readings those two manuscripts hold in common (not talking about the 90% of the NT text where there is no significant variation, but only in the 10% remainder). Multiply this beyond two manuscripts, and one quickly can see the individual manuscripts gravitating to their respective most common denominators -- groups of manuscripts with large percentages of readings held in common that differ from other groups of manuscripts that have their own large percentages of readings held in common.

    Basically, all sources tend to agree regarding the existence of the Alexandrian, Byzantine, and Western texttypes. Opinion is divided on the supposed Caesarean texttype, because the manuscripts that pertain to it tend not to have uniquely shared readings, but are only an amalgam of readings found in other texttypes. However, the *pattern* of readings found among the Caesarean manuscripts is itself unique, and thus should qualify that group for texttype status in some manner.

    Askjo: "2. Who invented four families of manuscripts?"

    No one "invented" the families. Various researchers over the past four centuries simply began to notice that certain "birds of a feather" tended to flock together. What was invented, however, were all the differing names for the various textual families as well as theories regarding their respective times and places of origin, and that is where all the debate regarding textual criticism, "best" text, "closest to the original" text, etc. is centered upon.
     
  3. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Askjo great topic I was wondering if you would mind listing some of the MSS in the differant "families". I only know a little about 2 and those would be the alexandrian and byzantine texts. Thanks [​IMG]

    1cross+3nails=4given
     
  4. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Various researchers? Please name them for me if you can.
     
  5. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure, I give you some lists for an example only.

    Papyrus Fragments

    P6 - Traditional (Byzantine)

    P25 - Western

    P38 - Caesarean

    P66 - Alexandrian

    Uncial Manuscripts

    E - Traditional

    T - Alexandrian

    O - Caesarean

    D - Western

    Minuscle Manuscripts

    1 - Traditional

    614 - Alexandrian

    828 - Caesarean
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Outstanding work so far, Askjo! Could it be that you're seeing through the KJVO facade, realizing there's nothing behind it?
     
  7. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    Askjo: “quote: Originally posted by Ziggy: No one "invented" the families. Various researchers over the past four centuries simply began to notice that certain "birds of a feather" tended to flock together.

    Askjo: “Various researchers? Please name them for me if you can.”

    Why should I? You can find their names in any handbook regarding textual criticism of the Greek New Testament. Get Metzger’s _Text of the New Testament_ and you will find all the names you want, dating from the time of the invention of printing to the present day.

    But the names are not necessary, and irrelevant to the facts: anyone can simply look at the collation data and statistical tabulation of manuscripts as published in the multi-volume _Text und Textwert_ series to see which manuscripts to group together in close relationship and which other manuscripts group together in other close relationships that are clearly different and distinct from the previous groups.

    If you don’t want to do the homework, don’t expect everyone else to do it for you. For myself, I don’t choose to spin my wheels in endless debate that goes nowhere.
     
  8. Ziggy

    Ziggy
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    Askjo: “Sure, I give you some lists for an example only.”

    >Papyrus Fragments
    >P6 - Traditional (Byzantine)

    >Uncial Manuscripts
    >E - Traditional

    >Minuscule Manuscripts
    >1 - Traditional

    Although manuscript E of the Gospels is indeed of the Byzantine or “Traditional” type of text, I have no idea from what source you obtained the erroneous information that either P6 or minuscule 1 were “Traditional”.

    The highly fragmentary P6 (as can be verified from the variants noted for Jn 10:1-10; 11:1-8, 45-52 in the Nestle-Aland apparatus) does *not* agree with the Byzantine text (Gothic “M” in NA27), and minuscule 1 is the leading member of the so-called “family 1,” which is specifically known because of its _deviation_ from the Byzantine type of text.

    You lean on erroneous sources, Askjo. Why not use the many more reliable sources that won’t give out such inaccuracies?
     
  9. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
    Accuracy is in the mind of the contemplator.
    Reliable is as reliable does.

    And other assorted drivel...

    HankD
     
  10. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thankyou Askjo. [​IMG]
     
  11. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who produced/invented families - the family tree - of manuscripts?
     
  12. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
  13. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one?
     
  14. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    How does the majority text method rate?
     
  15. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one? </font>[/QUOTE]Askjo, Didn't you understand Ziggy's post? The manuscripts fall into different "text-types". You yourself name different manuscript families. Nobody "invented" those. You talk about the "Alexandrian" family, who invented it?

    Now, if you are saying, who wrote the Alexandrian manuscripts, then that would be a legitimate answer to research. If the data is available.

    Nobody invented the fact that you were "born" to your mother and father and that they were each born to their parents. Your family is a group.

    The same with the documents. In early centuries A.D. the books were spread around to different countries and scribes made copies in each of those countries. Each group had a specific way of writing. For instance, the Greek written by a Helenistic Jew was very different from the Greek written by a Jew that Greek was a second language. Many of the documents were written by diaspora Jews who left Israel under pressure of the Roman empire and other reasons. A lot of the documents that you claim are bad (such as the Alexandrian) were often written by these Jews who had just as much MORE reason to save the documents intact. These were Christians living in evil places, but this does not make the manuscript bad, simply because Alexandria was a generally wicked place.

    Finally, look at some common sense.

    Most all of the scribes who would spend their lives copying these manuscripts were totally committed to what they copied. It was hard, arduous work.

    It was much more likely for a well-meaning scribe to add a word or sentence here and there to help harmonize the scripture than it would be for a scribe to (horrors) take away God's word. For this reason, we find more additions in manuscripts than we find subtractions. Most subtractions are copyist MISTAKES that are caught by comparing documents.

    Additions; however, keep getting added when the new manuscripts are copied. These people didn't commit their lives to handwriting manuscripts for the "fun" of it. They were sincere about the work they were doing and some had no problem with either harmonizing scripture with their own words, or just adding a little more explanation to make sure the manuscript fit their belief system.

    The amazing thing about all of this is that the "Word of God" shines right through and HAS been maintained accurately. No other book (or group of books) in the world has been copied so many times, in so many places and maintained its doctrine 2000 years later.
     
  16. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one? </font>[/QUOTE]Askjo, Didn't you understand Ziggy's post? The manuscripts fall into different "text-types". You yourself name different manuscript families. Nobody "invented" those. You talk about the "Alexandrian" family, who invented it?

    Now, if you are saying, who wrote the Alexandrian manuscripts, then that would be a legitimate answer to research. If the data is available.

    Nobody invented the fact that you were "born" to your mother and father and that they were each born to their parents. Your family is a group.

    The same with the documents. In early centuries A.D. the books were spread around to different countries and scribes made copies in each of those countries. Each group had a specific way of writing. For instance, the Greek written by a Helenistic Jew was very different from the Greek written by a Jew that Greek was a second language. Many of the documents were written by diaspora Jews who left Israel under pressure of the Roman empire and other reasons. A lot of the documents that you claim are bad (such as the Alexandrian) were often written by these Jews who had just as much MORE reason to save the documents intact. These were Christians living in evil places, but this does not make the manuscript bad, simply because Alexandria was a generally wicked place.

    Finally, look at some common sense.

    Most all of the scribes who would spend their lives copying these manuscripts were totally committed to what they copied. It was hard, arduous work.

    It was much more likely for a well-meaning scribe to add a word or sentence here and there to help harmonize the scripture than it would be for a scribe to (horrors) take away God's word. For this reason, we find more additions in manuscripts than we find subtractions. Most subtractions are copyist MISTAKES that are caught by comparing documents.

    Additions; however, keep getting added when the new manuscripts are copied. These people didn't commit their lives to handwriting manuscripts for the "fun" of it. They were sincere about the work they were doing and some had no problem with either harmonizing scripture with their own words, or just adding a little more explanation to make sure the manuscript fit their belief system.

    The amazing thing about all of this is that the "Word of God" shines right through and HAS been maintained accurately. No other book (or group of books) in the world has been copied so many times, in so many places and maintained its doctrine 2000 years later.
    </font>[/QUOTE]I asked question: Who invented them? Ziggy answered "No one!" That is very interesting because I realize one problem that MV defenders would agree with Ziggy, but the fact is that I guess that they refuse to admit answering to my question or maybe they do not know who did them. I look at the KJV onlyists. I wonder, they know who did them or not.
     
  17. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Askjo, I think the problem is with your word "invent". Perhaps if you used another more applicable word, the discussion would go better.
     
  18. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is nothing wrong with a word, "invent."
     
  19. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    "identified" or "categorized" would be better.
     
  20. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would even settle for discovered.
     

Share This Page

Loading...