Iasion

Greetings,

No we don't, at least, not exactly.
We only have a rough idea of the time frame.


Our earliest MSS are from LONG afterwards :
* P52 - 2nd century, a TINY scrap
* p90 - 2nd century, a small scrap
* a few from late 2nd century.

You are evading the point.

We do NOT have the originals.
We do NOT know exactly when (or where, or by who) they were written
We have LATER copies of copies.

Which means we CANNOT how close they are to the originals.


Iasion

Roger Pearse

To clarify slightly:

The number of manuscripts extant containing a text tells us nothing about whether the text itself tells a true story. The same applies to every form of communication, including books -- fiction is more popular than textbooks -- and indeed internet posts.

The point that I think is being made is about the reliability of the transmission. Other things being equal, a text transmitted in a lot of manuscripts will be better preserved than one transmitted in a single manuscript.

All of this is just common sense, of course.

Well, I would not know, but we are not discussing Chinese mss, but those which have come down from antiquity.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

If this is long after, what do we call Tacitus, preserved in a single ms of the 8th and 11th centuries?

If this is so, since all these remarks apply more strongly to the classics than to the bible, if we took this view we would be obliged to discard all literature from antiquity. The modern age exists because in the renaissance we all took a different view.

Surely this is not a point of disagreement between Christians and atheists as such, but between those who know about ancient literature and love it (of both kinds) and the others.

I think that we have fallen into obscurantism here, I'm sorry to say. I do not propose to throw away my copy of Pliny's letters because no copy earlier than 8 centuries later exists. Does anyone?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Helpmabob

Hi NZSkep - Not sure where the 99.5% comes from. I find the different translations refreshing and instructive. They can shed more light on what the original author was trying to convey than a single rigid text would allow. It is fantastic that there are a great multitude of translations, and it is indicative of the power of the message it contains that so many have spent such time and effort in bringing it to others.

Hi Magdlyn - I think Jesus was shown to be angry elsewhere, such as when He chased the moneylenders from the temple. Jesus was without sin, but not without human character. He healed them, either way.

Hi aa5874 - Not sure this thread requires a proof of God, or presumes a belief in God. When it comes to questions of why would God do things a certain way, then it involves at least some speculation. But every moment spent considering the ways of God has its reward I reckon, even if no actual conclusions are reached.

gregor

Mr. Pearse

Surely you are not being intentionally obtuse. On the one hand we have ancient literature, fidelity in the transmission of which means virtually nothing to the layman. Whether Achilles rode on a colt or a donkey wouldn't matter to this fiction.

However, on the other hand, we have a series of texts purportedly written by the very God of Abraham, ever jot and tittle of which is essential to save your immortal soul. Methinks provenance, antiquity, and fidelity in the latter case is somewhat relevant.

darstec

Thank you. You are so helpful in giving me a bookmark I have had for years and have read many times. But I think this note at the bottom of the page sums it up very nicely:
Naurally if that were true, there couldn't be much controvery, now could there?

My questions were because of what I saw, not the lack thereof. In addressing your example, I asked "You mean to say the second scribe left whole and obvious gaps in the line?" Your answer was to provide a link which never answered the question. But once again thanks for the link. The fault was mine for assuming you had more knowledge on the subject than you do.

I also noted, "We can also see some very faded lines that are much longer than the ink overs, as well as some shorter lines than the ink over." Which neither you nor the link addressed.

Of course I also asked:Like you, "I've been assuming that you were more familiar with the ..... facts about Vaticanus than you are." However I was going for more than basic.

darstec

So if there was a novel with a first run of 1000 copies were published and lost, and the second edition of this novel has a misprint or material added/deleted and 10 million copies were made of it. And the third edition copied the second edition with 15 million copies made, the vast number of 25 million copies assures us that we now have a faithful rendition of the original?

Yes, I can certain see how that works, by copying the mistake in greater numbers, just like water changes into wine, mistakes transubstantiate into truth. Christians do tend to depend a lot on transubstantiation, don't they?

Julian

You cannot compare the two situations. Print is an entirely different matter, statistically speaking. With handwriting you are guaranteed variations. The time of the copy and the frequency distribution does, indeed, say something about reliability. The real problem here is a lack of early manuscripts, i.e. we have no early picture of variant distribution, severity or causality.

Julian

Roger Pearse

If you say so. You will appreciate, I am sure, that the latter involves a large number of theological statements about the activity, intentions, and methodology of the deity; before I could evaluate your statement, I would need to see some evidence that these reflected His views accurately, and it may well be that some divine revelation would be required.

In my ignorant way, I find no evidence in the fathers of the view that the scriptures were in some way unlike all other literature; on the contrary, while holding a somewhat undefined view that this literature was 'inspired' they were fully aware of the problems of copying.

So I suggest that there is a confusion in here somewhere, if the suggestion is that, to be of divine origin, it must nevertheless be transmitted in quite another fashion to all other literature (and in some language other than a human one, involving imprecision as the latter does?). If the latter is so, it would be interesting to see the oracles on which this is written.

Are not two different things under discussion? The first is whether (in normal human terms) we have the text. The second is whether or not they are divinely inspired. To the former the answer must be 'yes'; the latter can be of interest only to Jews and Christians, I would have thought.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

Would it not be reasonable, tho, to suppose that it is similar to the same factors as viewed in 15th century Italian mss where we have the copy from which a number of descendants derive? Such as the 34 (?) mss of Tacitus?

All the best,

Roger Pearse