Williams, Peter J.Abstract: This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of role play integrated with word cards on studentsРІР‚в„ў speaking skill for communication. A New Approach to Textual Criticism: An Introduction to the Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (Atlanta/Stuttgart: SBL/Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2017) РІР‚СљChallenges in New Testament Textual Criticism for the Twenty-First Century,РІР‚Сњ Journal of Evangelical Theological Society 52, no. РІР‚СљThe Gospel According to Bart: A Review Article of Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman,РІР‚Сњ Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 49, no. The Textual History of the Greek New Testament: Changing Views in Contemporrary Research. Manila: Asia Theological Association, 2011. Scribal Habits in Early Greek New Testament Papyri. Textual Scholarship and the Making of the New Testament. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament 2nd Edition. Mark 1-8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. РІР‚СљResensi Buku A New Approach to Textual Criticism: An Introduction to the Coherence-Based Genealogical Coherence,РІР‚Сњ Jurnal Theologia Aletheia (terbit September 2018). Grand Rapids/Carlisle: Eerdmans/Paternoster, 2002. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.Р”Р‡rance, R.T. Studies in the Theory and Method of New Testament Textual Criticism. РІР‚СљMultivalence of the Term РІР‚ВOriginal TextРІР‚в„ў in New Testament Textual Criticism,РІР‚Сњ Harvard Theological Review 92 (1999): 245-81Р”В®pp, Eldon J. РІР‚СљThe Twentieth Century Interlude in New Testament Textual Criticism,РІР‚Сњ Journal of Biblical Literature 93 (1974): 386-414.Р”В®pp, Eldon J. РІР‚СљText, Translation, and Theology: The New Testament in the Original Greek?РІР‚Сњ Filologia Neotestamentaria 13, no. Holmes, eds., The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis. РІР‚СљA Leper in the Hand of an Angry Jesus.РІР‚Сњ Dalam Studies in the Textual Criticism of the New Testament. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005.Р”В®hrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. Grand Rapids/Leicester: Eerdmans/Apollos, 2002.Р”В®hrman, Bart D. РІР‚СљMen, Manuscripts, and Mercy: Searching a Merciful God amongst the Variants,РІР‚Сњ 1-12 (makalah yang tidak diterbitkan, disampaikan dalam Bible Research Seminar di AGST Filipina 2016).Р”В®dwards, James R. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001.Р”В®bojo, Edgar B. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.Р”В«rooks, James A. Rethinking New Testament Textual Criticism. Keywords: New Testament Textual Criticism, Pregenealogical Coherence, Coherence-Based Genealogical Method, Mark 1:41, Initial TextР”В«lack, David A. At the end of this paper, the writer will discuss in brief as to why the scribes altered the reading РџС“РџР‚РћВ»РћВ±РћС–РџвЂЎРћР…Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В¶РџвЂљ to be Р±Р…Р‚РџРѓРћС–Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В·РџвЂљ. These conclusive external evidences, therefore, must not be set aside. In this paper, the writer intends to show that the pregenealogical coherence analysis on the text strengthens the validity of the external evidences in supporting РџС“РџР‚РћВ»РћВ±РћС–РџвЂЎРћР…Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В¶РџвЂљ as the initial text. Although most witnesses support the primacy of the reading РџС“РџР‚РћВ»РћВ±РћС–РџвЂЎРћР…Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В¶РџвЂљ, most scholars consider that the reading is secondary. Kata-kata kunci: Kritik Teks Perjanjian Baru, Pregenealogical Coherence, Coherence-Based Genealogical Method, Markus 1:41, Teks AwalР”Вiscussion as to the text of Mark 1:41 is one of the most interesting textual discussions.

Di akhir tulisan, penulis akan mendiskusikan secara singkat kemungkinan transkripsional (transcriptional probability) mengapa penyalin mengubah bacaan РџС“РџР‚РћВ»РћВ±РћС–РџвЂЎРћР…Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В¶РџвЂљ menjadi Р±Р…Р‚РџРѓРћС–Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В·РџвЂљ. Karena itu, bukti eksternal yang konklusif ini tidak boleh diabaikan begitu saja. Dalam tulisan ini, penulis akan menunjukkan bahwa bukti yang didapat dari analisis pregenealogical coherence makin memperkuat validitas bukti eksternal dalam mendukung bacaan РџС“РџР‚РћВ»РћВ±РћС–РџвЂЎРћР…Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В¶РџвЂљ sebagai teks awal. Mayoritas sarjana menganggap bahwa bacaan РџС“РџР‚РћВ»РћВ±РћС–РџвЂЎРћР…Рћв„–РџС“РћС‘РћВµР±Р…В¶РџвЂљ adalah bacaan sekunder, meskipun bacaan ini didukung oleh mayoritas saksi. Mark AbstractР”Вiskusi teks Markus 1:41 merupakan salah satu diskusi teks yang paling menarik.

Awal dan akhir php