早期新约手抄本和它们的年代——神学古文献学的批判

IF 0.2 3区 哲学 0 RELIGION Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses Pub Date : 2012-11-01 DOI:10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957937
P. Orsini, W. Clarysse
{"title":"早期新约手抄本和它们的年代——神学古文献学的批判","authors":"P. Orsini, W. Clarysse","doi":"10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"— The date of the earliest New Testament papyri is nearly always based on palaeographical criteria. A consensus among papyrologists, palaeographers and New Testament scholars is presented in the edition of NESTLE–ALAND, 1994. In the last twenty years several New Testament scholars (THIEDE, COMFORT–BARRETT, 1999, 2001 and JAROS, 2006) have argued for an earlier date of most of these texts. The present article analyzes the date of the earliest New Testament papyri on the basis of comparative palaeography and a clear distinction between different types of literary scripts. There are no first-century New Testament papyri and only very few papyri can be attributed to the (second half of the) second century. It is only in the third and fourth centuries that New Testament manuscripts become more common, but here too the dates proposed by COMFORT–BARRETT, 1999, 2001, and JAROS, 2006 are often too early. 96013_ETL_2012-4_07.indd 467 29/01/13 14:25 468 P. ORSINI – W. CLARYSSE","PeriodicalId":42509,"journal":{"name":"Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses","volume":"118 1","pages":"443-474"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"43","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their Dates A Critique of Theological Palaeography\",\"authors\":\"P. Orsini, W. Clarysse\",\"doi\":\"10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957937\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"— The date of the earliest New Testament papyri is nearly always based on palaeographical criteria. A consensus among papyrologists, palaeographers and New Testament scholars is presented in the edition of NESTLE–ALAND, 1994. In the last twenty years several New Testament scholars (THIEDE, COMFORT–BARRETT, 1999, 2001 and JAROS, 2006) have argued for an earlier date of most of these texts. The present article analyzes the date of the earliest New Testament papyri on the basis of comparative palaeography and a clear distinction between different types of literary scripts. There are no first-century New Testament papyri and only very few papyri can be attributed to the (second half of the) second century. It is only in the third and fourth centuries that New Testament manuscripts become more common, but here too the dates proposed by COMFORT–BARRETT, 1999, 2001, and JAROS, 2006 are often too early. 96013_ETL_2012-4_07.indd 467 29/01/13 14:25 468 P. ORSINI – W. CLARYSSE\",\"PeriodicalId\":42509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses\",\"volume\":\"118 1\",\"pages\":\"443-474\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"43\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957937\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/ETL.88.4.2957937","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 43

摘要

-最早的新约莎草纸的日期几乎总是基于古地学标准。纸莎草学家、古抄写家和新约学者之间的共识在雀巢-奥兰1994年版中提出。在过去的二十年里,一些新约学者(THIEDE, COMFORT-BARRETT, 1999,2001和JAROS, 2006)认为这些文本的日期更早。本文在比较古学和明确区分不同类型的文学手稿的基础上,分析了最早的新约莎草纸的日期。没有第一世纪的新约莎草纸,只有很少的莎草纸可以归因于第二世纪(下半叶)。直到第三和第四世纪,新约手抄本才变得更加普遍,但是COMFORT-BARRETT(1999年、2001年)和JAROS(2006年)提出的日期也往往太早了。96013 _etl_2012-4_07。2013年1月29日:468 P. ORSINI - W. CLARYSSE
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Early New Testament Manuscripts and Their Dates A Critique of Theological Palaeography
— The date of the earliest New Testament papyri is nearly always based on palaeographical criteria. A consensus among papyrologists, palaeographers and New Testament scholars is presented in the edition of NESTLE–ALAND, 1994. In the last twenty years several New Testament scholars (THIEDE, COMFORT–BARRETT, 1999, 2001 and JAROS, 2006) have argued for an earlier date of most of these texts. The present article analyzes the date of the earliest New Testament papyri on the basis of comparative palaeography and a clear distinction between different types of literary scripts. There are no first-century New Testament papyri and only very few papyri can be attributed to the (second half of the) second century. It is only in the third and fourth centuries that New Testament manuscripts become more common, but here too the dates proposed by COMFORT–BARRETT, 1999, 2001, and JAROS, 2006 are often too early. 96013_ETL_2012-4_07.indd 467 29/01/13 14:25 468 P. ORSINI – W. CLARYSSE
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses (ETL), founded in 1924, is a quarterly publication by professors of Theology and Canon Law at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and the Université catholique de Louvain (Louvain-la-Neuve). Each volume totals ca. 1300 pages. Issues 1 (April) and 4 (December) contain articles, book reviews and chronicles in various languages (English, French, German). Issue 2-3 (September) represents the annual Elenchus Bibliographicus, an extensive bibliography of books and articles that appeared during the preceding year. The bibliography (ca. 15,000 entries) covers the entire field of Theology and Canon Law: History of Theology, History of Religions.
期刊最新文献
Returning to Mark 16, 8: What's new? Anastasius of Sinai and His Participation in the Monothelite Controversy Alternation between Aorist, Historical Present and Imperfect: Aspects of Markan Narrative Style The Sayings Gospel Q in Marcion’s Edition of Luke Phonemes, words and sentences, and the Buddhist unconditioned
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1