Comments on: Hobbins on the Canon, Part 3: An Excerpt http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/hobbins-on-the-canon-part-3-an-excerpt/ Biblical theology, stripped bare of denominational confessions and theological systems Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:00:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Jonnathan Molina http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/hobbins-on-the-canon-part-3-an-excerpt/#comment-736 Jonnathan Molina Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:41:07 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=218#comment-736 Thank you for bearing with me as I get a grasp of all these things, you're very kind; I wrote that because the paper seemed to emphasize that as if people weren't doing that...now I know why (lol). Thanks again! Thank you for bearing with me as I get a grasp of all these things, you’re very kind; I wrote that because the paper seemed to emphasize that as if people weren’t doing that…now I know why (lol). Thanks again!

]]> By: MSH http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/hobbins-on-the-canon-part-3-an-excerpt/#comment-729 MSH Thu, 16 Apr 2009 06:22:35 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=218#comment-729 @Jonnathan Molina: among those who do textual criticism, it is axiomatic that the point is not the Urtext. One would have to be omniscient to "know" (or even suspect) that one can work back to the original text and recognize it when one sees it. The point is rather making sense of the manuscript data that we have with the goal of producing an accurate text (guessing that it reflects the original in large degree, but not to the level of the Urtext). @Jonnathan Molina: among those who do textual criticism, it is axiomatic that the point is not the Urtext. One would have to be omniscient to “know” (or even suspect) that one can work back to the original text and recognize it when one sees it. The point is rather making sense of the manuscript data that we have with the goal of producing an accurate text (guessing that it reflects the original in large degree, but not to the level of the Urtext).

]]> By: The Canon of the OT « kilbabo http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/hobbins-on-the-canon-part-3-an-excerpt/#comment-722 The Canon of the OT « kilbabo Sat, 11 Apr 2009 15:38:18 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=218#comment-722 [...] interactions with John Hobbins ‘thoughts about canon’ posts here, here and here. I have found this discussion very interesting and helpful. The topic of the canon, especially the [...] [...] interactions with John Hobbins ‘thoughts about canon’ posts here, here and here. I have found this discussion very interesting and helpful. The topic of the canon, especially the [...]

]]> By: Jonnathan Molina http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/hobbins-on-the-canon-part-3-an-excerpt/#comment-718 Jonnathan Molina Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:54:16 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=218#comment-718 Oh, and one more thing: the information provided is with consent of the blog's author as he said, he offers it Copyleft so long as you tell where the information was found :) ! Oh, and one more thing: the information provided is with consent of the blog’s author as he said, he offers it Copyleft so long as you tell where the information was found :) !

]]> By: Jonnathan Molina http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/04/hobbins-on-the-canon-part-3-an-excerpt/#comment-717 Jonnathan Molina Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:49:36 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=218#comment-717 After doing a search for pluriform cannon, I found a blog (hebrewscripturesandmore.com by David Hymes) in which the author posts what seems a dissertation on "An Introduction & Experiment in Pluriform Textual Studies: Numbers 10.1-10ff." I give the link for the interested as it goes into much scholarly detail: http://hebrewscripturesandmore.com/APTS-Subpages/BOT640/Documents/Numbers-10-AnExperiment.pdf At the crux of it seems to be that academics should start embracing the idea that one should sidestep the Urtext as the ultimate goal of OT textual-criticism and that the way has been paved to do just that (thanks to men such as: Koester, Ehrman, Parker, and Epps) followed by an example out of Number 10 (see footnote 27 on page 5--Bénédict Lemmelijn, "What are we looking for in doing Old Testament Text-critical Research?" Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, 23/2 (1997), 69-80. Now, I'm no expert, but it seems Hobbins take on the cannon balances with Hyme's nicely. Though I offer my complete apologies for not knowing of the authors listed (save Ehrman whose work has been weighed in this blog before--I'm not a fan, per se); Dr. David Hyme's blog should make a nice addition to your blogroll, Dr. Heiser. I am now a fan of his (as I remain yours), having found someone in my tradition (my church has roots in the Pentecostal movement) who is a multiple degree holder and teacher of biblical languages with experience n textual-criticism who is also down-to-earth about the C-P movement's deficiency in theological knowledge..yay! After doing a search for pluriform cannon, I found a blog (hebrewscripturesandmore.com by David Hymes) in which the author posts what seems a dissertation on “An Introduction & Experiment in Pluriform Textual Studies: Numbers 10.1-10ff.” I give the link for the interested as it goes into much scholarly detail:

http://hebrewscripturesandmore.com/APTS-Subpages/BOT640/Documents/Numbers-10-AnExperiment.pdf

At the crux of it seems to be that academics should start embracing the idea that one should sidestep the Urtext as the ultimate goal of OT textual-criticism and that the way has been paved to do just that (thanks to men such as: Koester, Ehrman, Parker, and Epps) followed by an example out of Number 10 (see footnote 27 on page 5–Bénédict Lemmelijn, “What are we looking for in doing Old Testament Text-critical Research?” Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, 23/2 (1997), 69-80.

Now, I’m no expert, but it seems Hobbins take on the cannon balances with Hyme’s nicely. Though I offer my complete apologies for not knowing of the authors listed (save Ehrman whose work has been weighed in this blog before–I’m not a fan, per se); Dr. David Hyme’s blog should make a nice addition to your blogroll, Dr. Heiser. I am now a fan of his (as I remain yours), having found someone in my tradition (my church has roots in the Pentecostal movement) who is a multiple degree holder and teacher of biblical languages with experience n textual-criticism who is also down-to-earth about the C-P movement’s deficiency in theological knowledge..yay!

]]>