Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New TestamentNestle, Eberhard
Religion
Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament
Nestle, Eberhard
Bible. New Testament -- Criticism, Textual
Compare also what Zahn says in his _Einleitung_, ii. 314. “A
comparison of the quotations in Matthew with the LXX. is rendered
more difficult by the fact that in manuscripts of the latter written
by Christians, and especially in Cod. Alexandrinus, the text of the
O. T. has been accommodated to the form in which it is cited in the
N. T. _Cf._, also, p. 563 on the quotation from Zechariah xii. 10,
found in John xix. 37.” The same writer says (p. 465): “In the
Chronicle of Georgios Hamartolos (circa 860), all the manuscripts
save one assert the peaceful death of John (ἐν εἰρήνῃ ἀνεπαύσατο),
but this one says the very opposite, μαρτυρίου κατηξίωται, and goes
on to make certain other additions.” On the other hand, we must not
forget in this connection the testimony preserved by Eusebius to the
scrupulous care taken by Irenæus for the propagation of his writings
in the identical form in which he wrote them. According to that
historian, he wrote at the end of one of his works the following
note:—Ὁρκίζω σε τὸν μεταγραψόμενον τὸ βιβλίον τοῦτο κατὰ τοῦ Κυρίου
ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ κατὰ τῆς ἐνδόξου παρουσίας αὐτοῦ, ἧς ἔρχεται
κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, ἵνα ἀντιβάλλῃς ὃ μετεγράψω καὶ κατορθώσῃς
αὐτὸ πρὸς τὸ ἀντίγραφον τοῦτο ὅθεν μετεγράψω ἐπιμελῶς, καὶ τὸν ὅρκον
τοῦτον ὁμοίως μεταγράψῃς καὶ θήσεις ἐν τῷ ἀντιγράφῳ.[122]
(2) It was Lagarde who most clearly recognised and pointed out the
unsatisfactory way in which the Fathers had previously been edited.
How much care is necessary in the matter of the text is shown by the
discussions connected with the treatment of Scriptural quotations in
the new Vienna edition of Augustine (see _Urt._, 76, 94; Preuschen,
in the _ThLz._ for 1897, 24, col. 630). Even in the new Berlin
edition one cannot absolutely rely on the form of the Scriptural
quotations exhibited in the text, but must always verify it by means
of an independent examination of the apparatus. A few passages from
the first volume of Origen recently published will show this, and
prove at the same time how faulty the editions have been hitherto.
This first volume of Koetschau’s new edition of Origen opens with
the _Exhortation to Martyrdom_ (εἰς μαρτύριον προτρεπτικός), a work
which is to be assigned to the year 235. The text of previous
editions is grounded solely on a manuscript at Basel written in the
sixteenth century (No. 31, A. iii. 9), which is itself a copy, and a
not altogether correct copy, of a Parisian manuscript written in the
year 1339, not known to the first editors of Origen (P = suppl.
grec. 616). Moreover, the Basel manuscript was not transcribed with
sufficient accuracy, or the print was not superintended with
sufficient care by the scholar who prepared the first printed
edition of 1674. With the help of a fresh manuscript (M = Venetus
Marc.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account