Phlox Pyros

Um...have in mind? Um...

That was well thought out on my part, huh?

Well, let's see. I suppose we could take a critical GNT and find some interesting variations in Alexandrinus and then look at them for ourselves in this text. I suppose I could lead if you like. Could be fun.

These photos are of the actual manuscript, correct? Not someone's copy of it. I know there's a book out there that reproduces the text but it is not really the original manuscript.

Phlox Pyros

I think this would be interesting. What do you think of my suggestion to Chris?

Phew! You scared me there for a minute! LOL You must mean modern miniscule (ie. the text type found in modern critical editions). True miniscule is definitely not easier to read than uncial. Uncial is actually quite easy to read if you know Greek letters...should just take brief practice to recognize the letter forms.

It would also be fun to include image snippets in the thread if possible.

Logic&Reason

come on smart guy, which one is it?

Chris Weimer

The photos are of a facsimile of the actual manuscript, not the actual manuscript itself. Hence, "facsimile" in the OP. However, I think it should be still 99% close to the actual manuscript, and from the little I've seen of actual manuscript photos, they look very similar. We can only trust for now that this is what we've got. A walk-through looking for differences in A v. critical GNT might be more for this forum to handle... I would suggest another as more appropriate.

Phlox Pyros

Does anyone want to do a translation? What book? Want to look at some variations between Alexandrinus and either the Byzantine text (approx. the KJV) or the Alexandrian text (approx. the NIV, etc.)?

Or just drop it? Either way, thanks again for the link.

Logic&Reason

dodging my question because you don't have the answer? Which version is the literal translation?

Phlox Pyros

LR, give it up... I believe Chris was just joking.

Julian

A (02) is essentially a Byzantine witness so it might be interesting to see just how close it is to TR. Larry Hurtado did some calculations on correspondence in Mark to other families in his excellent and important thesis Text-Critical Methodology and the Pre-Caesarean Text: Codex W in the Gospel of Mark (or via: amazon.co.uk) which is a great read but very technical.

If we are going to do a section, I would suggest Mark and compare to B (03), א and TR. I think that might be fun.

Julian

Logic&Reason

Thats too bad, because I'd love to see how people have edited, erased and added to the bible from its original meanings and verse. Plus I could throw it in moms face.

Julian

There are thousands of manuscript and no two are alike. In order to see the differences, though, one must know greek and a few things about textual criticism. I have never heard of a translated critical edition with an apparatus, but I may be wrong.

Julian