Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Seeker2000 · 06-06-2005, 11:53 AM

I also couldn't find much about the Nero papyrus at all. On a newsgroups someone posted the following, but it seems to be from the D'Ancona book as well:

Quote:

"This takes us back to Qumran...one of the leather scrols and one of the papyri
look promising enogh to warrant closer investigation:both preserve passages
from Leviticus... The papyrus ...is written in far from uniform script...but
could be dated to the mid first century AD. the general appearence does present
similarities to the Magdalen script...some individual letters which are close
to the Magdelen script...
"Apart from the Leviticus papyrus... therre is the leather manuscript of the
same book. And here the proximity of overall appearence and individual letters
is indeed remarkable. ...If anything, the Qumran leather manuscript is more
archaic, as though it belongs to a slightly earlier period of the same style.
More regularly than in the Magdalen papyrus anf its Barcelona counterpart, for
example, letters touch or nearly touch each other. But even in the three small
Magdalen fragments, we find this phenomenon (which was almost completely
abandoned in second- and third-century Bible manuscripts surprisingly often,...
"...a dated manuscript resembling the Magdalen papyrus almost like a
twin,...does indeed exist...all four the farmer and the three officials, date
the document...."in th present 12th year of Nero Klaudios Kaisar Sebastos
Germanicus the Autokrator,'"..."
in the year 12 of Nero our Lord, Eeiph 30"-which is according to our calender,
July 24, 66."(Eyewitness to Jesus, Chapter 5)

From: http://groups.google.de/group/talk.o...427cf8b9f73377

Maybe one could find some historian on the net who has access to further material...

Steven Carr · 06-06-2005, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

But no one has said that the Nero papyrus was from a double columned codex, or from a codex at all or that it was written in a majuscule script. If Thiede is unwilling to provide details as to what makes the Nero papyrus a "twin" of the Matthean fragments then I don't see that we have any basis to conclude that Thiede has proven anything with this comparison.

The fact that Thiede did not produce a picture of this 'twin' in the book (mostly written by a Times editor) is a remarkable fact, and one which is highly suggestive.

Steven Carr · 06-06-2005, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by praxeus

Despite your obvious erudition and scholarship, at least on some issues, you have simply not shown yourself to be trustworthy in the realm of fairness and accusation and forthcomingness. Hopefully, that strong perception I have received is more an aberration than your actual nature, and I will be able to say something different in the future.

Can the moderators put a stop to this sort of thing?

Toto · 06-06-2005, 01:25 PM

Personal insults are a violation of the rules, as is speculation about another poster's motivations. Please use the "report bad post" button to alert the mods of violations rather than bringing the question up in the thread.

Steven Carr · 06-06-2005, 01:29 PM

Thiede himself wrote , it seems, 'I do not give a precise date, but suggest a date in the last third of the first century: The ‘starting point’ is the middle of the century; I allow for a variation of c. 20 years + / - and then opt for the later end, ‘soon after A.D. 70’'

And I don't think that Thiede used this manuscript from the time of Nero as one of his comparison documents in his journal articles.

It appears the Catholic apologist has out-Thieded Thiede....

Notsri · 06-06-2005, 01:42 PM

The merits of Steven's complaint notwithstanding, my best guess for the relevant, more detailed information on the Nero papyrus would be vol. 2 of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri - the vol. d'Ancona directs his readers to on p. 124 of the book.

Further on the same page, d'Ancona describes the script of the main document itself, as a "remarkably clear, careful uncial handwriting." And indeed, it is. A photo of the papyrus, along with transcription and translation, is found on pp. 172-3 of Adolf Deissmann's Light from the Ancient East.

Regards,
Notsri

Steven Carr · 06-06-2005, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Notsri

Further on the same page, d'Ancona describes the script of the main document itself, as a "remarkably clear, careful uncial handwriting." And indeed, it is. A photo of the papyrus, along with transcription and translation, is found on pp. 172-3 of Adolf Deissmann's Light from the Ancient East.

And is it a twin of the Magdalen Papyrus? (either the remarkably clear, careful hadnwriting or the distinctive, hurried handwriting)

Incidentally, d'Acona's reference is to a work published in 1899. While accurate, this is not something available to a layman like me. Borders has opened in Britain, but it has a limited stock.....

The birth of 12 sheep does seem to be a remarkably well preserved original document. I wonder how such a trifle of history was preserved, while God could not preserve any original documents......

Notsri · 06-06-2005, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

And is it a twin of the Magdalen Papyrus? (either the remarkably clear, careful hadnwriting or the distinctive, hurried handwriting)

To be fair, what d'Ancona actually says, is that the resemblance to the Magdalen Papyrus is "almost like a twin," which seems a fair statement to me (in my nonexpert opinion). Both texts are indeed written in a "clear, careful uncial handwriting," with only minor differences between the scripts, from what I can discern. (The "distinctive, hurried handwriting" of the Nero Papyrus belongs to the three notaries public who signed and dated the document.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Incidentally, d'Acona's reference is to a work published in 1899. While accurate, this is not something available to a layman like me. Borders has opened in Britain, but it has a limited stock.....

If you don't mind spending the cash, #2 (or 3) on this list would probably be of interest. Of course, Deissmann's book is fine for at least getting a good look at the papyrus, along with translation, and it's readily available in a reprint edition at Amazon.com.

Regards,
Notsri

Notsri · 06-06-2005, 05:11 PM

Just to quickly add to my last post, Steven, should you get a hold of the Oxyrhynchus volume, this "Nero Papyrus" is papyrus no. 246.

Regards,
Notsri

Steven Avery · 06-06-2005, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

I wonder how such a trifle of history was preserved, while God could not preserve any original documents......

Straw man.

Where did God say that He would preserve "original documents", or that "original documents" have any relevance in His concepts of Scripture ? Or that Timothy used "original documents" when he studied the Scriptures ?

He may well know the human propensity to make idols, as with the brazen serpant, out of such, as well.

Shalom,
Praxeus
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-06-2005, 01:25 PM	#24
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Personal insults are a violation of the rules, as is speculation about another poster's motivations. Please use the "report bad post" button to alert the mods of violations rather than bringing the question up in the thread.

06-06-2005, 01:29 PM	#25
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	Thiede himself wrote , it seems, 'I do not give a precise date, but suggest a date in the last third of the first century: The ‘starting point’ is the middle of the century; I allow for a variation of c. 20 years + / - and then opt for the later end, ‘soon after A.D. 70’' And I don't think that Thiede used this manuscript from the time of Nero as one of his comparison documents in his journal articles. It appears the Catholic apologist has out-Thieded Thiede....

06-06-2005, 01:42 PM	#26
Notsri Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 220	The merits of Steven's complaint notwithstanding, my best guess for the relevant, more detailed information on the Nero papyrus would be vol. 2 of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri - the vol. d'Ancona directs his readers to on p. 124 of the book. Further on the same page, d'Ancona describes the script of the main document itself, as a "remarkably clear, careful uncial handwriting." And indeed, it is. A photo of the papyrus, along with transcription and translation, is found on pp. 172-3 of Adolf Deissmann's Light from the Ancient East. Regards, Notsri

06-06-2005, 05:11 PM	#29
Notsri Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 220	Just to quickly add to my last post, Steven, should you get a hold of the Oxyrhynchus volume, this "Nero Papyrus" is papyrus no. 246. Regards, Notsri

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.