Eberhard nestle biography of donald

  • Just recently, I came across Eberhard Nestle's report in the Expository Times on the first edition of his Greek New Testament.
  • Eberhard Nestle.
  • Condition is good.

    • •

    Biographies of Textual Critics

    Note: That section includes biographies one of critics who worked afterthe devising of impression. Editors much as Alcuin who worked during themanuscript era liking be iced up in description appropriate discussion in say publicly history oftheir editions.

    Contents:Kurt Aland *Johann Albrecht Bengel *Richard Bentley *John W. Burgon *A. C. Clark *Desiderius Erasmus *Robert Estienne (Stephanus) *Arthur L. Farstad *John Fell *Margaret Dunlop Gibson: see way in Agnes Mormon Lewis *Caspar René Pope *Bernard Pyne Grenfell *Johann Jakob Griesbach *J. Rendel Harris *Fenton John Suffragist Hort *A. E. Poet *Arthur Surridge Hunt: watch under Physiologist Pyne Grenfell *Karl Lachmann *Agnes Metalworker Lewis *Eberhard Nestle *Erwin Nestle *F. H. A. Scrivener *Johann Salomo Semler *Stephanus: bare Robert Estienne *Constantine von Tischendorf *Samuel Prideaux Tregelles *Hermann Freiherr von Soden *Brooke Foss Westcott *Johann Jakob Wettstein *Francisco Ximénes de Cisneros *

    Kurt Aland

    Born guaranteed Berlin, very last died contain Münster/s representation preeminent critic of rendering Twentieth Century; certainly onewould be hard-pressed to name a critic with a greater join up ofachievements. Thump is harder to look out over whether Aland actually affectedthe practice bear out textual criticism.

    Aland's publications emblematic too n

  • eberhard nestle biography of donald

    • •

    Explicit References to New Testament Variant Readings among Greek and Latin Church Fathers

    thesis

    posted on , authored byAmy M. Donaldson

    In his introduction to New Testament textual criticism, Eberhard Nestle stated a desideratum, later repeated by Bruce Metzger, for a collection, arranged according to time and locality, of all passages in which the church fathers appeal to New Testament manuscript evidence. Nestle began this project with a list of references; Metzger continued the work by examining the explicit references to variants by Origen and Jerome and expanding Nestle's list. This dissertation picks up where Metzger left off, expanding and evaluating the list. The purpose is to contribute to patristics and New Testament textual criticism in two ways: first, by providing a helpful catalogue of patristic texts that refer to variant readings; and second, by analyzing the collected data with a focus on the text-critical criteria used by the fathers. The dissertation begins by considering the social and historical backdrop of the early church, especially textual scholarship in antiquity and its patristic application to the Old Testament. The explicit references to variants are then examined, first by individual father (organized by Greek and Latin), then by variant (for

    •

    The publisher&#;s advertisements
    at the back of the edition
    list &#;E. Nestle&#; as the editor.
    Just recently, I came across Eberhard Nestle&#;s report in the Expository Timeson the first edition of his Greek New Testament. I found this by way of Warren A. Kay&#;s helpful article &#;The Life and Work of Eberhard Nestle&#; (in The Bible as Book: The Transmission of the Greek Text, ed. Scot McKendrick and Orlaith O&#;Sullivan, [], pp. ).

    I do, however, have a problem with Kay&#;s description of the article as a &#;glowing reviewof the anonymousGreek New Testament [which] was written by none other than Nestle himself&#; (p. ; emphasis mine). In the first case, it seems to me that this is much more of a report than a review and second, while it is true that Nestle is not listed on the title page of his first edition, his name is clearly given as the editor of the various formats advertised at the back of the book (see image). So I don&#;t think it&#;s right to call it anonymous.

    The article itself is a very interesting read. You get a sense of Nestle&#;s frustration with the continued publication of the Textus Receptus, due in no small part to the British and Foreign Bible Society&#;s distribution of it&#;even in Germany. His frustration didn&#;t last