Apollos and Alexandria

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
spin
Posts: 2075
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Apollos and Alexandria

Post by spin » Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:22 pm

Hey, Ben C., great work.

The Latin confirms all the differences found in the Greek, the "word of the Lord" (perhaps "way" to "word" so as not to confuse "way" in v.26), "concerning Jesus" (rather than "Lord") and "way" (not "way of God").

(I'm guessing your edited Greek used accents, which can't be shown on my phone.)

Any thoughts about these "certain Corinthians" development? How could it end up in the text? What mechanism? A touch added by an itinerant preacher which was recorded as a marginal gloss, then crept into the text?

And thanks Andrew for the link.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 5832
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Apollos and Alexandria

Post by Ben C. Smith » Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:38 pm

spin wrote:
Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:22 pm
Hey, Ben C., great work.

The Latin confirms all the differences found in the Greek, the "word of the Lord" (perhaps "way" to "word" so as not to confuse "way" in v.26), "concerning Jesus" (rather than "Lord") and "way" (not "way of God").

(I'm guessing your edited Greek used accents, which can't be shown on my phone.)
Yes, it had accents. Only the unedited BibleWorks 9 version did not.
Any thoughts about these "certain Corinthians" development? How could it end up in the text? What mechanism? A touch added by an itinerant preacher which was recorded as a marginal gloss, then crept into the text?
Many of the features of the Western text of Acts give the impression of a different recension or even of a rough draft which was later polished up (that is actually one theory out there: the author published a rough version, and then later published a more streamlined version). Entire verses are added sometimes, not just individual phrases. The Western text actually has an extra "we" passage (compared to the Alexandrian version) in Acts 11.26-27, which seems likely to be connected to the church tradition that Luke the physician hailed from Antioch. It looks to me, if the Western text be judged generally secondary, as if somebody went through the text and "clarified" things like that in the light of tradition and narrative flow. (The same "we" passage in Acts 11.26-27 also adds that "there was much rejoicing" when the prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch, which comes across like a simple storyteller's touch, though it also tends to emphasize the pristine relationship between Antioch and Jerusalem that we find in Acts.) Perhaps Papias' or Hegesippus' works were consulted and used to add details to Acts where they overlapped (pure speculation on my part). Overall, I am still quite unsure about how the two recensions of Acts came into being. I have notes and comparative texts spread out among about 10 text files, but I am still trying to piece it all together.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΕΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply