Nazaroo

Wrong! Wrong again. Sinaiticus DOESN'T have the 'common single dot scribal punctuation' It ONLY has text-critical marks. It has no punctuation at all.

Quit embarrassing yourself like this. It's painful to watch.

I can do both.


Tell you what...you tell me by what authority John the Baptist spoke, and I'll tell you by what authority I speak.

Nazaroo

(1) Codex Sinaiticus.

(2) This isn't rocket science.

(3) By its usage in a manuscript or in part of a manuscript by a given scribe.



Really. No one should have to hold your hand for this:

(1) Go study the pages of John in Codex Sinaiticus.

(2) Note carefully the difference between dots added by a subsequent corrector (no space is allotted for the dot by the original hand), with dots made in the original hand of the scribe (space is alloted for the dot, separating the letters further apart).

(3) Examine the usage of the ORIGINAL scribe (Space and Dot) to that of the subsequent correctors, when applicable (Dot NO space).

Take two manuscripts and call me in the morning.

Riverwind

Phoney....

Riverwind

Look again. Tell me what function the other "text-critical" marks serve?

I just wish you really knew who was getting embarrassed. If you did, you'd stop now.

That's pretty telling...but I'll tell you by what authorities I speak...

Manuscripts of the Greek Bible - Metzger
An Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography - Thompson
The Palaeography of Greek Papyri - Kenyon
Greek Palaeography - Gardthausen

...inter alia...

but then you knew that, right?

Nazaroo

Hmmm. A quick google shows that RISA is:

RISA the Recording Industry of South Africa, or

RISA Racing Information Services, Australia, or

RISA -3D Structural Engineering Software co. or

RISA Technologies or

RISA Song Lyrics Archive or

RISA Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments.

I guess you are attempting guilt by association or some other ad hominem, but you lost us totally on this one.

Riverwind

Yes, you should, because you are the one making the bogus claims.

Did that long ago. That's helpful, thanks.

I need something quantifiable. I need you to tell me exactly how much "space" there is in a "dot and space" text critical notation. In other words, what is its measure. I can go to any dot I want and say "there's a space after this one, it must be a text critical notation".

You MUST make your case and you are not making it. You have given one example (which I find to be wholly unbelievable). If you really desire people to take your claims seriously, you MUST make your case by providing other examples (as Gibson pointed out) where this "dot and {quantifiable} space" point out a textual variant and are not, in fact, the punctuation mark that everyone here believes them to be.

Riverwind

Don't worry about it too much. If the shoe fits, and only you would know if it did, then wear it...

Nazaroo

Just listen to you: You are talking like it was 1950.

I don't have to make any case at all, for anything.

I am not even trying to 'prove' anything.

I couldn't care less if I convinced anyone about anything.

You have completely misread and misunderstood who you are talking to.

You are living in the past.

Science just isn't conducted this way anymore. Real scientists don't set out to 'prove' theories. They only explore possibilities, and try to calculate or quantify probabilities to provide guidelines for predictive purposes.

Nobody cares whether early scribes used or mis-used dots on their manuscripts. I know I don't care.

The subject of the inquiry (NOT debate, or thesis, or theory or even hypothesis), is whether or not John 8:1-11 was an original part of the edition of John that we know by that name.

Its a modest inquiry, not a debate. I am only providing whatever evidence and reasoning can be found or worked out. You are free to reason all you like about anything you like.

But please, start your own thread and see if other people really care about what you are babbling about.

People are reading this thread because of the topic, a topic I chose, not you.

Honestly. Kids today have no manners, nor any sense of what scientific inquiry really is.

Riverwind

Make possibilities into probabilities and I'll buy into this. Anyone can come up with possibilities, like there is an invisible pink unicorn up there in outer space.

Regardless, you still haven't shown probability.

I often wonder just how old someone is when they begin to assume that they are older than everyone else. If you knew the ages of some of the participants in this forum (myself included), you might be quite surprised. This ain't a junior high, high school, or college click.

Riverwind

Apparently you did care, because there are at least two pages of it now.

That must have been before you realized that it wasn't helping your opening case any.