The large number of textural variations doesn’t necessarily
detract from the validity of early oral traditions that formed the basis of the synoptic gospels. Although we only have copy of copies without an original, that is also the case with many other forms of ancient literature.
detract from the validity of early oral traditions that formed the basis of the synoptic gospels. Although we only have copy of copies without an original, that is also the case with many other forms of ancient literature.
Using contextual
analysis we can attest to an overall validity, to accept the many variations,
which in effect don’t materially affect the overall consistent meanings attributed to the texts.
3 comments:
Well said. That's a good summary of the talk.
It seems to me that significant corruption lies in the [literal] interpretation of holy writ. I find that deep meditation, coupled with the desire to understand the truth, often gets round transcription errors. Jesus himself seemed to play fast and loose on occasion with the bible.
Hi Tom,
As you may have gathered, if you had a chance to listen to the latter part of his lecture, there are over 5700 Greek only manuscripts of the NT, 10000 in Latin, but incredibly over a million quotations of the texts by the church fathers.
Scholars can peruse this treasure trove, with the oldest to date circa 100-150CE. The remarkable truth is, that we are now possibly more so than in any past period, to generally validate the consistent meanings that were contained in the so called canon of the gospels.
Most of the rather obvious later additions and changes don’t materially affect the central message or meaning. The important point is, as you say, to be prepared to meditate or at least search out a meaning in thoughtful analysis.
Best wishes
Post a Comment