Now that's a typo...

I was using Schreiner's commentary on 2 Peter, Jude in NAC and found this sentence in his comments on Jude 5-7 (p. 443):

The Mishnah says there is no portion in the world to come for the flood generation, Sodom, and the though i found out that i have to retake my anatomy class, but oh wellwilderness generation (m. Sanh. 10:3), though a rabbinic debate on whether the wilderness generation will be saved is immediately noted.

Oops.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Alexander

LOL! Interns. Can't live with them, can't live without them

Rich DeRuiter

I was using Schreiner's commentary on 2 Peter, Jude in NAC and found this sentence in his comments on Jude 5-7 (p. 443):

The Mishnah says there is no portion in the world to come for the flood generation, Sodom, and the though i found out that i have to retake my anatomy class, but oh wellwilderness generation (m. Sanh. 10:3), though a rabbinic debate on whether the wilderness generation will be saved is immediately noted.

Oops.

[:)]

Confirmed here too. That's got to be nominated for the most interesting scribal insertion in a theological work in modern history.

Did you report this typo with the typo reporting process in the Logos program?

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342379#Comment_342379

Confirmed here too. That's got to be nominated for the most interesting scribal insertion in a theological work in modern history.

He he. I checked the scanned copy at Google books, and it's not in there. Probably occurred when it was being edited for Logos.

There's a whole new cause of scribal errors nowadays: the "oops, the wrong window had focus when I was typing" error. I do it at work regularly, but usually I don't embarrass myself too much. Often when it happens, I'm wondering "where did my typing go?".

(I wanted a screencap of it for posterity.)

Jacob Hantla

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342393#Comment_342393

That is hilarious! Looks like the problem is on Logos' end. Here is a screenshot of that page of the commentary thanks to Amazon.com:

Oops...no more chatting while creating Logos resources

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342408#Comment_342408

Oops...no more chatting while creating Logos resources

"I found out from the Personnel Department I have to retake my typing exam" [:S]

David Bailey

LOL [:)]

Gary O'Neal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342379#Comment_342379

Did you report this typo with the typo reporting process in the Logos program?

I did.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342379#Comment_342379

That's got to be nominated for the most interesting scribal insertion in a theological work in modern history.

[:)]

Michael A. Lasley

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342412#Comment_342412

I was surprised by this the other day in Easton's Bible Dictionary:

Dan — a judge. (1.) The fifth son of Jacob.

Naphtali — my wrestling, the fifth son of Jacob.

Robert M. Warren

it could have been a lot worse.

Allen Browne

I was using Schreiner's commentary on 2 Peter, Jude in NAC and found this sentence in his comments on Jude 5-7 (p. 443):
The Mishnah says there is no portion in the world to come for the flood generation, Sodom, and the though i found out that i have to retake my anatomy class, but oh wellwilderness generation (m. Sanh. 10:3), though a rabbinic debate on whether the wilderness generation will be saved is immediately noted.

What a clanger!

Once again, Logos proves to be a useful teaching tool. I think I can use this for teaching about lower textual criticism. :-)

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342438#Comment_342438

This is great.

I think this could make a great human interest post on the blog, perhaps even solicit a reaction from the employee/contractor who flubbed this one... like how did the retake go? [;)]

Mike Childs

I certainly hope no one gets in any trouble for this. It gave me a laugh, and no doubt will be quickly fixed.

We all make mistakes. When I think of all the bloopers I have made in 37 years in the pulpit....

Rich DeRuiter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342489#Comment_342489

I certainly hope no one gets in any trouble for this

I think the appropriate punishment would be to retake that anatomy class again

. . . but not tell anyone this time.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342428#Comment_342428

That is hilarious!

I was surprised by this the other day in Easton's Bible Dictionary:

Dan — a judge. (1.) The fifth son of Jacob.

Naphtali — my wrestling, the fifth son of Jacob.

That one seems like an editor's glitch (insertion from something in his personal life) too, at first glance, but I think it's correct. The name "Naphtali" literally means "my wrestling"

The mistake in it, however, is that he was the sixth son, not the fifth son. Dan and Naphtali couldn't both be the fifth son.

Ward Walker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342461#Comment_342461

I was using Schreiner's commentary on 2 Peter, Jude in NAC and found this sentence in his comments on Jude 5-7 (p. 443):
The Mishnah says there is no portion in the world to come for the flood generation, Sodom, and the though i found out that i have to retake my anatomy class, but oh wellwilderness generation (m. Sanh. 10:3), though a rabbinic debate on whether the wilderness generation will be saved is immediately noted.

What a clanger!

Once again, Logos proves to be a useful teaching tool. I think I can use this for teaching about lower textual criticism. :-)

Clearly what we have stumbled upon here is the heretofore unknown source "L"--proving that textual curation occurred via some secret scribal sect, linked in purpose but distributed across physical expanses lest they be repressed by their dreaded nemesis, the editorial guild. We now know they didn't work alone, but were apparently a hive mind, collaborating with some sophisticated technique known now only as "IRC"...

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342465#Comment_342465

This is great.

I think this could make a great human interest post on the blog, perhaps even solicit a reaction from the employee/contractor who flubbed this one... like how did the retake go?

Likewise a wee bit curious about retake, appears "anatomy class" has one typo insertion, though though has couple attachments to a footnote:

When searching for words, wonder about pop-up choices providing more opportunities to smile. [;)]

Keep Smiling [:)]

Robert M. Warren

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342508#Comment_342508

he was the sixth son, not the fifth son.

Not quite as bad as PDQ Bach, the twenty-first of Bach's twenty kids.

Lynden O. Williams

I was using Schreiner's commentary on 2 Peter, Jude in NAC and found this sentence in his comments on Jude 5-7 (p. 443):

The Mishnah says there is no portion in the world to come for the flood generation, Sodom, and the though i found out that i have to retake my anatomy class, but oh wellwilderness generation (m. Sanh. 10:3), though a rabbinic debate on whether the wilderness generation will be saved is immediately noted.

Oops.

Made me smile Gary, thanks for posting. A good lesson for all those who multi-task on the computer. Could have been worse. The editor, could have posted something more personal.

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342537#Comment_342537

My version shows that it was there from as early as 2009. Someone with Libronix should check to see if it is much older.

Tom Reynolds

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342538#Comment_342538

My version shows that it was there from as early as 2009. Someone with Libronix should check to see if it is much older.

My Libronix version dated 2007-07-05 has the typo as well. Has no one being reading this commentary or didn't file a typo report?

I wonder if Bob will fire someone today...

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342538#Comment_342538

My version shows that it was there from as early as 2009. Someone with Libronix should check to see if it is much older.

Even if someone is using Libronix, if they are keeping their resources up-to-date, they'd have the most recent version, which is dated 2009.

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342553#Comment_342553

My Libronix version dated 2007-07-05 has the typo as well. Has no one being reading this commentary or didn't file a typo report?

I wonder if Bob will fire someone today...

The NAC comes with Silver, the first version of which was released back in 2006 if my memory and order page is correct. I then went to the internet time machine and found the Romans commentary product page as an example. The earliest date for it is June 5 2004 http://web.archive.org/web/20040625005337/http://www.logos.com/ebooks/details/NAC27 .

I think it's reasonable to assume a college junior or senior was working for Logos (or subcontracting for a vendor) in 2003 or 2004 and made this mistake. It's flown under the radar for a long time, either because people weren't paying attention, reporting or because Logos hasn't revised this resource for typos in its life. Either way there is a lot of water under the bridge for this resource.

On an unrelated note, browsing Logos.com from 2001 to 2005 was an eye opening experience. I was a Logos user most of that time but I didn't really use their web site, just evaluated the ads they sent my way and ordered over the phone. Logos has come a long, long way. The pre-pub lists back then were short!

Jannie van Niekerk

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342590#Comment_342590

Thanks for the report! This typo has been corrected and you will see the correction when we ship the currently-being-updated NAC series at a not too distant, future date.

Paul-C

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342772#Comment_342772

...the currently-being-updated NAC series.

Thank you. [Y]

Ron

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342772#Comment_342772

we ship the currently-being-updated NAC series at a not too distant, future date.

Woohoo!!

Alexander

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342772#Comment_342772

Thanks for the report! This typo has been corrected and you will see the correction when we ship the currently-being-updated NAC series at a not too distant, future date.

Aww! It was like an Easter Egg... should almost keep it for posterity sake... seeing how old it is

EmileB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342537#Comment_342537

This really is a hoot... and provides a great message as well, albeit unintended. So often in my studies I have read comments from those disparaging the historical reliability of the biblical text, due to the purported existence of numerous scribal errors that undoubtedly entered into the text due to the activities of "primitive" copyists. Something that surely would not take place today with our more "sophisticated" printing methods. When once compares the relatively minimal number of errors made by the ancient copyists in preserving the original text, with a goof of this magnitude, it really highlights the pride and arrogance of modern man and current "scholarship". This gaff really needs to be preserved in an illustration book.

Gary O'Neal

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342887#Comment_342887

This gaff really needs to be preserved in an illustration book.

At least someone at Southern Seminary should print a copy for Dr. Schreiner.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342887#Comment_342887

It can also illustrate how easy it can sometimes be to figure out what was the inserted text and what was the originally intended text. We were able to compare with other extant "manuscripts" and even if not, we would have been able to tell from the context what words should not have been there.

EmileB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/342939#Comment_342939

very true! and let's hope so! it would just be something, wouldn't it, if out of all the versions, copies, etc. currently circulating of this text, the one manuscript version that survives happens to be this one? Two thousand years from now, can you imagine the pages of theological expertise that will be written, debating the text, and the discussions that will ensue about what the good doctor meant among those who accept the text as genuine?