Reading an Apparatus

[RafeAndersen]

Hi friends. I am in my undergraduate years in Bible college but I desire to learn how to read an apparatus. Does anyone know of a good book, podcast series, or teaching set that I could get ahold of to learn how to do so? If this is a dumb question, forgive this newbie.

[PhilT]

An easy level one is

David Allan Black: New Testament Textuak Criticism A Concise Guide Grand Rapids Baker 1994. It along with class notes got me through the my Greek paper-Evaluation of variants. Its cheap, easy to read contains History, Theory and Practice . This book does contain worksheets and worked examples

 

and Metzger's commentary on the UBS 4

 

for theory

 

Types in Dan Wallace Textual Criticism into Utube there is a set of videos there.

Edited November 6, 2014 by PhilT

[RafeAndersen]

An easy level one is

 

David Allan Black: New Testament Textuak Criticism A Concise Guide Grand Rapids Baker 1994. It along with class notes got me through the my Greek paper-Evaluation of variants. Its cheap, easy to read contains History, Theory and Practice . This book does contain worksheets and worked examples

 

and Metzger's commentary on the UBS 4

 

for theory

 

Types in Dan Wallace Textual Criticism into Utube there is a set of videos there.

Thank you very much, friend!

[rokas]

There is also a helpful chapter on how to read UBS4, NA27 and Metzger's commentary in this book (together with an example of some verse from the book of James in the NT):

http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-New-Testament-Exegesis-Studies-ebook/dp/B009XGGRPE

 

It's a nice handbook overall, which provides step-by-step process of exegesis with examples for each step, so if that is of interest to you, you might "kill to birds with one stone".

[RafeAndersen]

There is also a helpful chapter on how to read UBS4, NA27 and Metzger's commentary in this book (together with an example of some verse from the book of James in the NT):

http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-New-Testament-Exegesis-Studies-ebook/dp/B009XGGRPE

 

It's a nice handbook overall, which provides step-by-step process of exegesis with examples for each step, so if that is of interest to you, you might "kill to birds with one stone".

Now I feel silly. I have that book. Thanks, friend.

[rokas]

You're very welcome. Now you might test waters for free

[tony10000]

I was going to recommend Blomberg's book as well. Reading it now and it is excellent.

[dlrude]

Hi all,

I saw this thread and was happy to find it. I think that my question is more basic than what has been discussed. I will try to elaborate and clarify my questions hoping that someone may be able to help me.

I have a question that has been haunting me. I am a very casual and occasional user of an apparatus. I (attempt) to use them to see what manuscripts may or may not contain a certain verse or phrasing. That’s the extent of my interest.

I have found this to be an illusive task. Firstly I think that I do not understand the syntax that is used. I have tried and read some about it.

Focusing in the CNTTA apparatus alone for now I can say that I have read the CNTTS apparatus “preface” and try to follow it.

I am perplexed by this quote form it;
“In presenting the manuscript evidence, each verse has an initial entry that contains information about which manuscripts are extant versus those with lacunae.”

So I look at Luke 22:43 and see this in CNTTS apparatus;



Luke 22:43-0 L 0 P75 ℵ01 A02 B03 D05 E07 G011 H013 K017 L019 M021 N022 Q026 S028 U030 W032 Y034 Δ037 Θ038 Λ039 Π041 Ψ044 Ω045 1 2 13 69 118 124 157 209 346 565 579 700 788 1071 1346 1424 1582 2358 ƒ1 ƒ13 MT TR a b c e f ff2 i q


Based on the quote above I am thinking that the L and this is the initial entry that the Sinaitic text (ℵ01) is missing something when compared to NA-27. I believe that NA-27 is the same as UBS4 so I put UBS4 next to GNT- Sinaiticus and GNT-Tishendorf and to a curser hover compare manually but frankly I cannot see why aleph 01 is listed as part of the lacunaes. It may be due to word differences that I am too dense to notice. So looking further because the real reason that I looked here was to see if verse 43 and 44 were missing from Sinaiticus. A few lines down I see this;

Luke 22:43-1 S 0 [[22:43-44]] ℵ01✱ D05 E07 F09vid G011 H013 K017 L019 M021 Q026 S028 U030 Y034 Δ037 Θ038 Λ039 Π041 Ψ044 Ω045 1 2 13c 118 157 209 346 565 700 1071c 1346 1424 1582 2358 ƒ1 MT TR a b c e ff2 i q

This looks to me like verses 43 and 44 are missing in Sinaiticus. Some additional things add to my confusion here let me try to elaborate what I think my questions are;

1) Does “[[22:43-44]]” mean that the verses are missing in a text? i find no comments about double brackets in the CNTTS preface.

2) CNTTS preface says this about the asteric (ℵ01✱) “* indicates the reading of the original hand of a manuscript (B*) “ does anyone know just what that means? Is that a statement about a possible different scribe’s handwriting in a manuscript?

3) What does “Luke 22:43-1 S 0 [[22:43-44]] ℵ01✱” mean? I find it perplexing because if the double brackets mean missing then how can one identify who didn’t write it? I have something really wrong in trying to follow this syntax.

4) Anyone have a clue as to why Sinaiticus is listed with lacunaes in the initial line; Luke 22:43-0 L 0 P75 ℵ01 ?

BTW- I am aware that there are probably better ways to find the answer to my initial question but now I just want to learn the CNTTS apparatus syntax (if possible).

Thanks, Dave Rude

Edited November 12, 2014 by dlrude

[Timothy Jenney]

Hello, friend!

 

[Chuckle] Yes, I suspect that CNTTS + casual user =frustration!

 

Why not start with a simpler resource? I recommend Comfort's text commentary. It covers the major textual variants in the NT and explains their significance quite well. If it doesn't provide enough detail, you can always open CNTTS and dig deeper.

[dlrude]

Thanks,

 

I may try Comfort's I know of such options like Metzger and so on.

 

I would just like be able to read the CNTTS syntax. Even if I never use it again I want to be able to follow it.

 

I am a retired engineer I don't give up easily. :-)

 

Dave

 

p.s. maybe you are saying that by using Comfort that I could learn the CNTTS syntax?

Edited November 12, 2014 by dlrude

[Timothy Jenney]

Yes, I do think using Comfort (or Metzger) may help, especially if you start with one of them and then go to the same textual variant in CNTTS.

 

If you open CNTTS in its own zone (directly from the Library), you can use the browser to navigate to CNTTS Textual Database Information. It gives a good overview of the resources.

 

[Matthew Burgess]

Hi Dave,

 

As far as I'm aware, the syntax of the CNTTS apparatus is unique to that apparatus, so Comfort's commentary won't teach you how to read it. However, I do think looking at a passage in another, more abbreviated apparatus will give you enough basic information to figure out what's going on in the same passage in CNTTS.

 

In the meantime, let me try to answer your questions about Luke 22:43-44 (the sweat as droplets of blood):

 

 

1) Does “[[22:43-44]]” mean that the verses are missing in a text? i find no comments about double brackets in the CNTTS preface.

 

 

In the discussion of these verses in the apparatus, the double brackets are included because the text of the 27th edition of the Novum Testamentum Graece (the edition of the Greek New Testament that serves as one of the base texts for the apparatus) places these verses in double brackets. The editors of this edition used double brackets to enclose a few passages that they felt were possibly unoriginal, but were part of an early and important stage of the textual tradition. (The story of the adulteress in John 7:53-8:11 is another example of a bracketed passage.)

 

 

2) CNTTS preface says this about the asteric (ℵ01✱) “* indicates the reading of the original hand of a manuscript (B*) “ does anyone know just what that means? Is that a statement about a possible different scribe’s handwriting in a manuscript?

 

Some manuscripts of the New Testament were changed or corrected at various points by the monastic scribes who copied and used them. For example, most textual critics believe that Codex Sinaiticus (the manuscript you're interested in here) was corrected several times: shortly after it was copied (in the 4th-6th centuries); again around the 7th century; again around the 12th century; and possibly at other times. When a passage has been changed or corrected in a manuscript, the asterisk is used to indicate the work of the original copyist, and exponents (or the letter "c" in CNTTS) is used to indicate the work of correctors.

 

 

3) What does “Luke 22:43-1 S 0 [[22:43-44]] ℵ01✱” mean? I find it perplexing because if the double brackets mean missing then how can one identify who didn’t write it? I have something really wrong in trying to follow this syntax.

 

 

It means that the original hand of Codex Sinaiticus includes the base text (in other words, the original hand of Codex Sinaiticus includes the passage that's being discussed as it is found in the 27th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece). When it discusses particular variants, CNTTS always begins by listing the manuscripts that include the text as it is found in the 27th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece; then it lists manuscripts that differ. If you look further down in the apparatus, you see that there's an abbreviation "OM," followed by another list of manuscripts. This is a list of manuscripts that "OMIT" the passage. Notice that the second manuscript listed there is "01c"... a corrector of Codex Sinaiticus.

 

 

4) Anyone have a clue as to why Sinaiticus is listed with lacunaes in the initial line; Luke 22:43-0 L 0 P75 ℵ01 ?

 

This is certainly confusing; it would be more appropriate to list "01c" here, since the lacunae was the result of a deletion by a corrector. However, in my experience CNTTS is not best apparatus for studying corrections; the new 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece is probably the best choice for this.

 

I hope this is helpful... and if you have more questions, be sure to ask them! The forums are a great place to discuss these sorts of things.

[dlrude]

Thank you , thank you Matthew that did help. It cleared up a few things and I see that if I had chosen to look at the Alexandrian manuscript it would have been much better.

 

Your comments make sense out of a number of comments that I had seen yesterday when I mouse hovered.

 

I am not a qualified user but I can muddle through some stuff now. :-)

 

I did go to the Sinaiticus site and looked at the photo of the manuscript where Luke 22:43 is.

 

I can see that it has the so called corrected verse in it and it makes me wonder how someone determined that was a correction.

 

It looks physically like it was there from time zero. Interesting to understand how they determine that it was a correction.

 

Thanks again, Dave

[Matthew Burgess]

In some cases, it can be difficult to determine whether a reading was added by the original copyist or by a corrector! In this case, however, I think we can be fairly certain that Luke 22:43-44 were deleted at some point by a corrector.

 

Here's an image taken from codexsinaiticus.org that shows the end of verse 42 and the beginning of verse 43 (with the magnification setting at maximum):

 

 

Can you see the light smudges around the text, beginning with the third line (the beginning of verse 43)? These smudges are traces of earlier letters that were erased. So, scholars have concluded that the verses were written by the original copyist, erased by a corrector, then rewritten by another corrector.

 

 

[dlrude]

Hi Matthew,

 

Yes that is the same image that I looked at.

 

LOL at myself!

 

I did notice the smudges and thought; those scribes were good they made little marks along the "paper" to help them keep the letters on a straight line. Guess I'll be keeping my day job!

 

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

Dave

[RafeAndersen]

An easy level one is

 

David Allan Black: New Testament Textuak Criticism A Concise Guide Grand Rapids Baker 1994. It along with class notes got me through the my Greek paper-Evaluation of variants. Its cheap, easy to read contains History, Theory and Practice . This book does contain worksheets and worked examples

 

and Metzger's commentary on the UBS 4

 

for theory

 

Types in Dan Wallace Textual Criticism into Utube there is a set of videos there.

PhilT

 

I bought David Black's book and have been studying it. Man, it is hard to remember what all the textual signs mean. Any tips you can give me for studying this?

Edited November 16, 2014 by RafeAndersen

[Matthew Burgess]

PhilT

 

I bought David Black's book and have been studying it. Man, it is hard to remember what all the textual signs mean. Any tips you can give me for studying this?

 

One of the possible advantages of beginning with the UBS edition of the Greek New Testament, rather than the Nestle-Aland edition, is that the UBS edition doesn't use the extensive sigla that are found in the Nestle-Aland edition. However, if you want to dig deeper into New Testament textual criticism, you have to learn them at some point, so why wait?

 

One way to reinforce the meaning of the symbols is to examine the apparatus for a particular passage, then read the discussion of that passage in a textual commentary (for beginners, I usually recommend the work of Comfort rather than that of Metzger, as it's a little more user friendly). That way, you begin to associate certain symbols with certain types of variants. Also, if you're using the apparatus in Accordance, you can quiz yourself by hovering the cursor over each symbol; the meaning of the symbol will be displayed in the instant details window.

 

When I took introductory Greek in divinity school, my instructor, Brent Nongbri, prepared a brief introduction to the apparatus that I found very helpful; Brent has made that introduction available here. Also, I've prepared an illustrated handout that uses some notable examples from the Nestle-Aland apparatus; you're welcome to download it if you think it might be helpful to you.

 

Kovacs Presentation Handout (Version 2).pdf

[PhilT]

Rafe,

 

We did all our exercises using UBS 4 and therefore was somewhat easier as not that many signs to learn. Start with UBS 4. Also if you have the NET Bible, many of the text notes deal with varriants. I am graduually learning the signs in NA 28, but takes some doing. If your college/seminary uses NA28. Then you just have to learn them. Same way as you learnt Greek paradigms. Thanks Matthew for chimming in. Will take a look at the handout later today, afte work

[Daniel R]

Aww shucks. And I thought this was gonna be about the BHS apparatus. Wrong language.

[RafeAndersen]

 

One of the possible advantages of beginning with the UBS edition of the Greek New Testament, rather than the Nestle-Aland edition, is that the UBS edition doesn't use the extensive sigla that are found in the Nestle-Aland edition. However, if you want to dig deeper into New Testament textual criticism, you have to learn them at some point, so why wait?

 

One way to reinforce the meaning of the symbols is to examine the apparatus for a particular passage, then read the discussion of that passage in a textual commentary (for beginners, I usually recommend the work of Comfort rather than that of Metzger, as it's a little more user friendly). That way, you begin to associate certain symbols with certain types of variants. Also, if you're using the apparatus in Accordance, you can quiz yourself by hovering the cursor over each symbol; the meaning of the symbol will be displayed in the instant details window.

 

When I took introductory Greek in divinity school, my instructor, Brent Nongbri, prepared a brief introduction to the apparatus that I found very helpful; Brent has made that introduction available here. Also, I've prepared an illustrated handout that uses some notable examples from the Nestle-Aland apparatus; you're welcome to download it if you think it might be helpful to you.

 

http://www.accordancebible.com/forums/public/style_images/master/attachicon.gifKovacs Presentation Handout (Version 2).pdf

Matthew, thank you so much for your advice I will download what you have provided.

I have the UBS4 as well as Comfort and Metzger's work and I will do as you say. Thanks again.

Edited November 17, 2014 by RafeAndersen

[RafeAndersen]

Rafe,

 

We did all our exercises using UBS 4 and therefore was somewhat easier as not that many signs to learn. Start with UBS 4. Also if you have the NET Bible, many of the text notes deal with varriants. I am graduually learning the signs in NA 28, but takes some doing. If your college/seminary uses NA28. Then you just have to learn them. Same way as you learnt Greek paradigms. Thanks Matthew for chimming in. Will take a look at the handout later today, afte work

Hey thank you, Phil. I am an undergraduate at the moment, I am just trying to get a head start and learn all I am able to learn right now. I have the UBS4 as well as the NET notes and I will do as you say, thanks.