I’ve been trying in the posts of this thread to explain why textual critics are often thought not to be expert in the wide range of topics that other New Testament scholars are well versed in. They are instead frequently seen as technicians who do the really hard, dirty work that no one else is either that interested in doing or knowledgeable about, even though some of it (not all) is thought to be necessary and important as a kind of preliminary exercise. But it’s to be done by others.
I, on the other hand, was long intrigued with textual criticism, from my early college days. When I went to Princeton Seminary (already knowing Greek) and took a course with Metzger on palaeography (the study of ancient handwriting in the manuscripts nd related topics) I was thrilled. In that course we learned how to “collate” manuscripts. I thought I’d died and gone to heaven.
Collating manuscripts, for most people, is no fun at all. It involves taking a manuscript – that is, a hand written copy – and comparing it word by word with a printed text, to see where it differs. You make a note of every single difference. And then you do it with another text. And another. And pretty soon you have lots of data, indicating what all the manuscripts have as their texts, at every point.
At the time, around 1980 or so – there were, practically speaking, only two ways to have access to Greek manuscripts of the New Testament: some (very, very few) were photographed and printed on books, and others (more) were available on microfilm. And so I learned how to do collations, using both media.
When I got the hang of reading manuscripts both in the more ancient uncial script (which looks kind of like our capital letters, uniformly made, and relatively easy to distinguish) and in the later minuscule script (which looks more like cursive writing, where letters are small case, written together, with numerous ligatures – that is, the letters taking different forms when combined with certain other letters; this is hard to get a handle on at first), and started collating manuscripts, I thought that this was the real deal, hard hitting scholarship, not the soft-core stuff that my colleagues in New Testament studies were doing. They were interpreting texts. Not that hard, I thought. I was *collating manuscripts*!!!
I wanted to devote my life to….
THE REST OF THIS POST IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY. If you don’t belong yet, YOU STILL HAVE A CHANCE!!!
Can you touch on this bart really quick ?
My question is on the Joseph and the bloodline of David ?
Of course, the proper name for John the Baptist, son of exiled Essene High Priest Zachariah in jewish tradition is John bar Zachariah, or Johanan bar Zechariah
And yes I know that is a way of distinguishing him from others. And you said you didn’t know of the name John bar zacariah oh we’ll.
Nazarenes
Contrary to the deliberate fables created by Paul, by Luke and his supporters, the father of Jesus was Joseph Ha-Rama-Theo (Arimathea) which means “His Divine Highness”.
2.
While Herod and his sons ruled as minor leaders under the Romans, Joseph was the eldest son of the royal dynastic line of ancient Kings of Israel and therefore from the line of Zedekiah, the last King of Israel.
3.
Joseph therefore was by birth a Sadducee and the richest Sadducee and reputedly the richest man in the world.
4.
The wealth of the crown prince plus how he happened to have the blood of the line of David in his veins are two of the largest anomalies of the New Testament- inconsistencies that the Christian church has spent centuries hiding.
5.
For the answer to both anomalies is that Joseph was in fact the High King of Ireland, the true descendent of Zedekiah and the most ancient divine bloodlines of history including the first priests of human history, the cuilleain (“divine holly spirits”).
I’m afraid we simply don’t know anything about Joseph’s geneaological line. The NT genealogies are hopelessly at odds, and the authors would actually have had no clue.
Right
So what about king david bloodline of jesus ?
And Caesar was a descendent of jupier bloodline ?
Ok that it why he says give Caesar what it is and give god what it is his and give jesus what it his
And line 30 of gosple of Thomas
So he has respects for other gods. ?
Bart
No around me knows anything of what I speak of and I’m just bloggin is all
“It was at that point that I realized both why textual scholars were not seen as doing significant work by other NT scholars and, more important, that I did not want to be like that.”
Well put, Dr. E.
so thats what it is, theological confession vs. historical jesus lol
My question also Prof. Erhman on Juptier ( roman ) and Zeus depicted George Washington in a statue, a him throwing a dollar across the lake or what ever it was, it was a superhuman feet maybe analogy, as well as chopping down a tree with ” I AM ‘ it is me ? haha John the Baptist stated something about if your tree does not produce good fruit you will be cut downed and burned. Obelisk in our nations capitol as well as New York? Did paris original name coming from Egyptian inspiration? So the masonaries with the Tool that makes a perfect circle with all seeing eye on $/1 bill with pyramid huh lol, any hoo, so if you were outside that perfect circle you had secrecy knowledge? yes right? sounds like Gnostic characteristics
just bloggin is all 🙂
You have much to thank the European scholar for inadvertently shaping the course of your life.
Oh dear. I cannot get out of my mind the situation two thousand years hence when textural critics are trying to make sense of the multiple denominations, divisions, subdivisions, cult prophets, sermonizers, ad infinitum of the present day Christian religions, much less all the other religions and their variants. With tongue planted firmly in cheek – perhaps you had better get started now on current texts. After all, there are so many texts available in all sorts of media. Is someone inputting them into an infinite relational database for benefit of those historians to come? It boggles the mind. Perhaps it is a good thing that there are so few scraps of original text and no audio or video recordings.
Textual, not textural. My poor edit job.
I often comment that centuries from now, there will be a select few highly specialized scholars whose competency is reading “Twitter English” so that they can read the Twitter feeds that are being archived here and there for posterity.
Oy vey! I had not even considered that, nor the Facebook and other social media.
funny how in my profile picture for example is the same kind of staff, stick with cross on it that which the pope carries around, what is that called and represent? i know of authority right.
can touch on this. why john the baptist is depicted as holding that, really quick in your own words
The staff with a cross shows that John is the forerunner of Jesus.
Right, question now is, Dionysus held a staff as we’ll ? How old is the story of Jupiter ( zeus )
Some oldest temples in world are to zeus ?
John the Baptist holds this?
As well as Dionysus ?
And the pigna ( rione of Rome )
The earliest cult images of Dionysus show a mature male, bearded and robed. He holds a fennel staff, tipped with a pine-cone and known as a thyrsus.
Are there base texts against which all the manuscripts are compared? Hard to imagine that collating would be useful to anyone if there weren’t generally accepted base texts everyone agrees on. Otherwise you’re just comparing two variables. Hard to imagine that would provide a useful reference. Sorry to drag this into the weeds, but it’s interesting!
Yes, there are established base texts — but it doesn’t matter which base text you use, so long as you indicate what it is, since if someone knows both the base text and the differences from the base text of the ms., then one knows that the ms. reads at every point.
My question is, if Jesus was a peasant from a none Royal Family, then why do Matthew and Luke speak of him as an ancestor form David 1040-970 were these analogies from religious teachings or were they literal ancestors of him, and Joseph the father of Jesus ? Can you touch on this really quick Bart.
Contrary to the deliberate fables created by Paul, by Luke and his supporters, the father of Jesus was Joseph Ha-Rama-Theo (Arimathea) which means “His Divine Highness”.
2.
While Herod and his sons ruled as minor leaders under the Romans, Joseph was the eldest son of the royal dynastic line of ancient Kings of Israel and therefore from the line of Zedekiah, the last King of Israel.
3.
Joseph therefore was by birth a Sadducee and the richest Sadducee and reputedly the richest man in the world.
4.
The wealth of the crown prince plus how he happened to have the blood of the line of David in his veins are two of the largest anomalies of the New Testament- inconsistencies that the Christian church has spent centuries hiding.
5.
For the answer to both anomalies is that Joseph was in fact the High King of Ireland, the true descendent of Zedekiah and the most ancient divine bloodlines of history including the first priests of human history, the cuilleain (“divine holly spirits”).
Matthew and Luke think that he *was* from the royal line. My view is that probably everyone in Palestine could be fit into David’s family tree, given the way geneaologies work….
I think the real question is which “staff” was bigger?
Question bart
On ACTS 14:12 again
So this barnbas why did they call him zeus ?
And Paul just an offspring
What did barnbas do in the bible for them to refer to him as that degree ? Can you give me an example real quick bart ?
Please and thank you
Paul was doing the talking, so he wsa the “messenger” of the Gods, and then his companion must have been the chief God himself. (I talk about this in How Jesus Became God.)
I am glad that you are not ‘like that. The main idea of textual criticism, that different ancient texts are different, is, however, very crucial.