Dr. Philip Payne RECOUNTS his DISCOVERY about the VATICANUS Distigmai

Рет қаралды 1,155

Күн бұрын

In part 1, Dr. Philip Payne recounts the discovery he made about the Distigmai in codex Vaticanus. He goes into great detail how textual criticism is related to the umlauts found in this manuscript and how textual variants can be seen in the distigmai.
#TextualCriticism #Vaticanus

Пікірлер: 17

@debras3806 5 ай бұрын

This guy is awesome!!

@PeymanSalarPodcast 4 ай бұрын

I have read two books by Payne and must admit that his primary argument about 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 has persuaded me.

@rosslewchuk9286 6 ай бұрын

Great start! Got to leave to moderate a Bible study. Blessings from Silver Spring, MD, USA!🙏

@gastie1 6 ай бұрын

I really appreciate all the qork youve put into making the area of textual criticism more accessable and have learnt a lot from them. Having said that, I found this one hard going. Dr Payne seemed to want to talk at you rather than with you and I didnt appreciate him brushing off your questions, so that he could carry on his talk. I'll be interested to hear the rest of the videos (and thankfully theyll be shorted 😂), but I'm not convinced there is a good reason to try and remove those verses from 1 Corinthians. Sorry that was quite a negative comment, I really do enjoy your material. Keep it up!

@Dwayne_Green 6 ай бұрын

its all good, the remaining parts are indeed shorter and a bit more accessible. I knew this one would be a bit more difficult for some but felt it was necessary for the later part of the conversation. We did talk at length about his idea of rejecting 1 Cor 14:35-36 in part 4, needless to say, I don't champion the idea and find it very problematic. I did offer up some rebuttal to his ideas though, and I don't feel as though he really addressed them. I was truly curious as to the kind of justification one would give that this passage is not scripture, he's not the first person I heard make this suggestion.

@stevenvalett1231 6 ай бұрын

Ver interesting once again. Thank you!

@kainech 6 ай бұрын

I won't be able to listen to the full thing for quite some time, life having gotten very busy, and I'm looking forward to it. However, his division of vv 33-34 in I Cor is what's printed in the Antonides text. I'm going to have to look at that closer when I have leisure again.

@patrickjames1492 6 ай бұрын

If this is so, does this become an argument in support of the New Testament scribe of Codex Vaticanus knowing a manuscript, or several, with a longer text in many of these places (four or more words, being in view)? If so, would Vaticanus show knowledge of what we call Byzantine readings, if not of a/the Byzantine text form, as early as the second century?

@Dwayne_Green 6 ай бұрын

I don't think it's a surprise that Byzantine readings are early, but yes, if this is true, then there would be *potential* support in Vaticanus for a number of Byzantine readings.

@patrickjames1492 6 ай бұрын

@@Dwayne_Green Thank you. I wonder if any of the places with Byzantine readings noted by Sturtz from p45 are distigmatized in Vaticanus. Also, are there distigmata at places where Codex Vaticanus is longer than the Byzantine Text, not just shorter? Peter Gurry draws attention to 1 John 2:23 and 1 John 3:1.

@DTzant 6 ай бұрын

I have a bad taste in my mouth toward anyone that doubts a passage of scripture is authentic….

@Dwayne_Green 6 ай бұрын

I hear you... In part 4 (soon to be released), I talked to Payne about why he thinks 1 Cor 14:35-36 is not scripture. Given the ample evidence in the manuscripts generally, I don't think there's much of a case to be made. But I was definitely curious how one could justify/defend this view.

@tommywasserman2713 6 ай бұрын

Hilarious

@Dwayne_Green 6 ай бұрын

@@tommywasserman2713 Hi Dr. Wasserman! I'd love to have you on to get your thoughts on Rabin and Gordon's research!

@D12Min 6 ай бұрын

He is doing all of this because he has a hardcore egalitarian agenda. Honestly shouldn´t be taken seriously at this point.