Jump to content

Comfort: Text commentary vs. Commentary on manuscripts


mortenjensen

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I have the "Comfort Text Commentary" (2008) and see a new Comfort work has just been released, "Commentary on the Manuscripts ..." - https://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=Comfort+MSS+Commentary.

There is a cross-grade. Is this the one to choose in order to "update" the 2008-work to this new one?

 

What are the differences between the two?

 

Morten

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot speak directly to the differences between Comfort Text Commentary and the newly-released Comfort MSS Commentary.

 

However, the crossgrade is NOT an update between the two. Crossgrades are "upgrades" of the same product between software platform. So if you own Comfort MSS Commentary in another software platform, the crossgrade is priced to allow you to purchase the same product in Accordance at a deeply discounted price. These are only available when allowed by the publisher and you are required to keep the previously purchased product and not sell or give it away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Morten, like you im interested in the new volume and Im hoping for others to chip in more extensively on the purpose and target audience of the new volume. From the right hand screen shot, it looks like the info on manuscripts is much more extensive.

 

but for those who havent got the (excellent and readable) original, here is a screenshot from hebrews 1:1-8 from the original comfort text commentary so you can compare the notes with the same passage on the product page of this new commentary on manuscripts volume.

You can see the text is totally different in content and which verses it relates to (no mention of 2 or 5 in the original and the notes on 3 and 8 are much more extensive in the original).

post-31185-0-04256200-1542120181_thumb.png

Edited by ukfraser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m interested too, it would be good to hear how these two volumes compliment and differ from each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Introduction to the MSS Commentary:

 

 

This commentary focuses on the textual readings in the many manuscripts of the New Testament. There are nearly 6,000 manuscripts, and just as many textual variants. Thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament have been discovered since the time of the Textus Receptus and King James Version, which were printed in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. And hundreds of New Testament manuscripts have been discovered in the past 100 years. Many of these are quite early—as early as the second, third, and fourth centuries. Some of the most important early manuscripts are the Beatty Papyri (45, ∏46, ∏47), the Bodmer Papyri (62, ∏72, ∏75), and the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (1–∏126).

 

Most commentaries usually adhere to a certain English translation, and the commentators refer to an edition of the Greek New Testament (such as Novum Testamentum Graece or the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament), diverging from it when they deem it necessary. These two Greek editions (which have the same text) were compiled according to the eclectic method, which means that various readings from various manuscripts were selected for the text on a verse-by-verse basis. In this commentary readers will be reading commentary on actual manuscripts, such as 75 for most of the Gospel of Luke, 66 and 75 for the Gospel of John, 46 for nearly all of Paul’s Epistles and Hebrews, and so on. (These are all second-century manuscripts). No other Bible commentary does this.

 

The early papyrus manuscripts (second and third century) cover nearly two-thirds of the New Testament (see the front section “Early Manuscripts” ). The text of all these manuscripts is freshly presented in The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (Comfort and Barrett). The remaining one-third is found in codices Vaticanus (designated as codex B) and Sinaiticus (designated as codex å), both from the mid-fourth century. And there are several other manuscripts that are dated c. 400—namely, codex Alexandrinus (A), codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C), codex Bezae (D), and codex Washingtonianus (W). And there are many more significant manuscripts. Chapter One provides an annotated list of the most significant manuscripts of the New Testament. This chapter also has discussions about how to assess the manuscripts and the canons of textual criticism.

 

There is another feature of this commentary that is found in no other commentary. English readers of the Bible, as well as those who read editions of the Greek New Testament, do not see that the New Testament manuscripts (from earliest times) were filled with nomina sacra (sacred names) written in a special way. In all the manuscripts, scribes presented the divine names with special calligraphy to distinguish these names as being sacred; the sacred names were written in contracted form with an overbar.

 

Certain divine names were almost always written as nomina sacra in the ancient manuscripts: God (theos), Lord (kurios), Jesus (Iesous), and Christ (Christos). There are a few occurrences where they are not written as nomina sacra; these are noted throughout. Special attention is given to the word “Lord” (kurios) when people are addressing Jesus. The nomina sacra form indicates that people, in several instances in the Gospels, were calling him “Lord,” not just “sir” (or “lord”). There are notes on this.

 

Other divine names are “Father” (pater), “Son” (huios), and “Spirit” (pneuma). In most instances, these were written as nomina sacra by the ancient scribes. However, the name was sometimes written in full (in plene; i.e., not in nomen sacrum form—not contracted with an overbar) when the scribe wanted to indicate a human father (or the “father” as the originator of something), an earthly son, or the human spirit. These are noted throughout. It must also be said the titles “Son of God,” “Son of Man,” and “Son of David” were written as nomina sacra in the ancient manuscripts—so as to indicate these are not to be translated as “a son of God,” “a son of man,” or “son of David.” These are noted throughout. The words “cross” and “crucify” were also written as nomina sacra in several early manuscripts, as well as the words “spiritual” and “Christian.” These are noted throughout the commentary. The Appendix provides a full discussion of the nomina sacra.

 

More than anything, this commentary is filled with notes on significant textual variants. Several of the notes on textual variants pertain to the fact that the earliest manuscripts often have shorter texts than what is found in later manuscripts. Throughout the history of textual transmission, the text grew larger by scribal additions. The earliest manuscripts have hundreds of readings that are shorter than what appears in later texts. This pertains to phrases, words, and entire verses. Indeed, the early text has over 60 verses not present in what many translations include today. This exclusion of verses is evident in the following places: Matthew 6:13b; 7:13; 12:47; 16:2–4; 17:21; 18:11; 21:44; 23:14; 26:49–50; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; 16:9–20; Luke 9:54–56; 17:36; 22:43–44; 23:17, 34a; John 5:3b–4; 7:53–8:11; 9:38–39a; 13:23a; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:6b–8; 28:29; Romans 16:24; Galatians 1:9; Hebrews 2:7b; 1 Peter 5:14b; Revelation 20:5a. There are notes throughout the commentary on these verses that are not included.

 

I also refer the reader to two other books I have written for further discussions on texts and the nomina sacra: New Testament Text and Translation Commentary and Encountering the Manuscripts, which are quoted in this book.

 

The translation of the New Testament portions used throughout the commentary is my own English rendering of the Greek.

 

Philip Wesley Comfort, A Commentary on the Manuscripts and Text of the New Testament, Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2015), 7-9.

 

From the Introduction to the Text Commentary:

 

 

After the introduction follows the commentary—from Matthew to Revelation—covering every textual variation noted in the major English translations. The notes explain every major textual difference between the following versions of the New Testament: King James Version (KJV), New King James Version (NKJV), Revised Standard Version (RSV), New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), English Standard Version (ESV), New American Standard Bible (NASB), New International Version (NIV), Today’s New International Version (TNIV), New English Bible (NEB), Revised English Bible (REB), New Jerusalem Bible (NJB), New American Bible (NAB), New Living Translation (NLT, revised), Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), and the NET Bible: New English Translation (NET). Within each note, each textual variant is marked as to whether that reading is found in the Nestle-Aland/United Bible Society Greek New Testament edition (noted as NU), the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament edition (noted as WH), or the Textus Receptus (noted as TR). Frequently, the notes explain textual differences between modern versions on the one hand and the Textus Receptus and KJV (and NKJV) on the other. Many of these variations are noted in the margins of modern versions in deference to the KJV tradition. The notes in this volume also explain significant differences among the modern versions.

 

In addition to the notes that focus on textual variations among the English versions, there is another kind of note that is intended to help English readers and Greek students understand other significant textual differences which (1) have influenced English versions in minor matters, (2) reflect a completely different textual tradition (this often occurs in the D-text in Acts), or (3) present an interesting interpretation. These notes provide English translations and explanations of many of the variants listed in the critical apparatus of the Nestle-Aland text.

 

 

Philip W. Comfort, New Testament Text and Translation Commentary, Accordance electronic ed. (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008), ix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is this a more expanded commentary over the Comfort we all have now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is this a more expanded commentary over the Comfort we all have now?

From the screenshot showing Hebrews and comparing it to my copy on the Hebrews section, it seems that what I have says more...even though my copy has no comments on Hebrews 1:2.

 

My take is, this new one probably covers every single verse with less comments, so it would fill in some gaps.

 

Maybe someone from Accordance can clarify.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nevermind, it doesn’t cover every verse either. But, yes, it does have less comments than the one I own. So I’m good with my copy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the most distinctive feature of Comfort's A Commentary on the Manuscripts and Text of the New Testament, is the detailed attention given to use of nomina sacra. In this respect it is unlike any other apparatus I own or have viewed.

 

Shalom,

Joseph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the preface graham helpfully included in this thread (many thanks), and from the screen shot on the product page, you can see how the nomina sacra is being highlighted with The son examples in verses 2, 5 and 8 (thanks solly)

 

I think the most distinctive feature of Comfort's A Commentary on the Manuscripts and Text of the New Testament, is the detailed attention given to use of nomina sacra. In this respect it is unlike any other apparatus I own or have viewed.

 

Shalom,

Joseph

Edited by ukfraser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think of Comfort's new commentary as comparable to Metzger but more up to date. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...