tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29482423.post2776526763881253984..comments2023-12-04T11:19:18.505+01:00Comments on the Amsterdam NT Weblog: Conjectural Emendation QuizJan Krans-Plaisierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06289844886277555959noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29482423.post-62379629088878750082010-08-03T16:57:57.048+02:002010-08-03T16:57:57.048+02:00Thanks Peter; correction is made. Nestle comes fir...Thanks Peter; correction is made. Nestle comes first.Jan Krans-Plaisierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06289844886277555959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29482423.post-21052881190159648202010-08-03T16:27:45.042+02:002010-08-03T16:27:45.042+02:00You have two #2s.
thanks for this.You have two #2s.<br /><br />thanks for this.Peter M. Headhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379103292621457026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29482423.post-47197877692603255362010-07-29T20:25:34.111+02:002010-07-29T20:25:34.111+02:00Rats, I was looking in Kenyon, But in chapter VII ...Rats, I was looking in Kenyon, But in chapter VII not Chapter I.Bob Relyeahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13063651264391311686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29482423.post-72946160719919248072010-07-29T17:03:43.792+02:002010-07-29T17:03:43.792+02:00Kenyon was easy to I.D...
I made the mistake of t...Kenyon was easy to I.D...<br /><br />I made the mistake of thinking this was from Hort somewhere:<br /><br />"Knowledge of authors should precede judgement of their conjectures."<br /><br />It is so Hortian as to be embarrassing. What is deliciously devious about it is its glaring ambiguity when one reads it twice with a twinkle...<br /><br />At first I read "authors" as authors of the NT documents, naturally enough, but then follows the jarring second half with the possessive "their conjectures".<br /><br />If one is awake for that, alarm-bells ring.<br /><br />Then comes the realisation that "authors" is just NT textual critics themselves, who can be safely ignored.<br /><br />Then comes gag #2: It parallels the argument against materialistic atheism that goes...<br /><br />"If your thoughts are just random molecules bouncing around, then I can safely ignore your argument for materialism. Its just random noise."<br /><br />peace<br />NazarooNazaroohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03584331774685466296noreply@blogger.com