Publisher’s Errata

in

Lawrence Lahey, “The Christian-Jewish Dialogues through the Sixth Century (excluding Justin).” In volume one of Jewish Believers in Jesus: A History from Antiquity to the Present, edited by Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik. (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007), 581-639.

Hendrickson Publishers re-edited my essay and introduced many errors after I had approved a proof of my chapter. This situation was brought to the attention of the editor Oskar Skarsaune, who attempted to correct the essay back to my approved proofs. He informed me that he would send me a final proof to check, which he never did, and the essay went to the press with numerous errors and unapproved changes remaining from Hendrickson’s re-edit.

What follows below is the list of corrections and changes that were sent to the publisher and editor, after a final proof reached me as the book was being printed but not yet bound. I and the editor asked that what follows be included as an errata sheet, but were told by Hendrickson that it was not possible.

[* indicates a small error made by Lawrence Lahey. Everything else is due to the publisher or the editor.]

A downloadable, printable PDF version of the errata can be obtained by clicking here.

1. P. 582, top paragraph, line 2: “(2)tractates”
—add blank space after “(2)”

2. P.582, 2nd paragraph, line 3: “In this way they help to fill in”
—add: “probably” after “help”

3. P. 582, 2nd paragraph, line 4: “They assist in filling in”
—add: “probably” after “They”
Note: These last two (2. & 3.) are carefully considered opinions, and they cannot stand without the qualifications (which were present in the proofs I approved, and were removed without my approval).

4. P. 582, 4th paragraph, last line: “Some of the best methods”
—add (= Restore, it was in the proofs I approved): “However,” before “some”
Note: without the “However” the contrastive idea of this key sentence is practically lost.

5. P. 583, top paragraph, line 2: “genre. These four methods are”
—There is no previous referent to “These four”!
—Restore “genre, namely,” (as I had approved) and remove “These four methods are”

6. P. 583, 2nd paragraph, last line: “these catechetical works”
—remove the added “catechetical” /It destroys the mention of “apologetic works” earlier in the sentence!
—If this omission effects pagination, you can say “both these works” or “both types of works”  /but I prefer simply a simple omission of “catechetical”

7. P. 583, footnote 6, last line: “this article”
—change “this article” to “this chapter” as you did in footnote 4.

8. P. 586, top paragraph, first line: “believer,”
—restore “Christian,”

9. P. 586, last word-P. 587, first word: “more modestly”
—omit “more modestly”  / it is a pleonasm, and I would never write it.

10. P. 587, note 20, second paragraph, third line: “1883], esp. 128),”
—should be changed to “1883]), esp. 128,” as in the example 3 lines further on: “1890), esp. 27-34,”

11. P. 588, 2nd paragraph, lines 2-3: “as an attempt to convert others, albeit a feeble one.”
—restore “as designed to convert others, albeit a feeble attempt.”
—Without the restoration, it loses the concept of purpose (“design”), which speaks to the main idea of the chapter!

12. P. 590, top paragraph, line 3: “the name “Mnason” is a variant of “Jason,””
—rearrange Mnason and Jason, so: “the name “Jason” is a variant of “Mnason,””
—I attempted to make a similar change by my handwritten note at this point when I returned my proofs. But it was not incorporated! The above change will be just as effective, and will not disturb pagination.

13 P. 590, note 34, line 5: “end of this article)”
—change “this article” to “this chapter” as you did in footnote 4.

14. P. 590, note 36, line 9” “Nason in D, itd;”
—add “bomss” after “itd,” like this: “Nason in D, itd, bomss;”
—I attempted to make a similar change by my handwritten note at this point when I returned my proofs. But it was not incorporated!

15. P. 595, 3rd paragraph, first line: “For a substantial part of book two”
-Restore “CZA is included here because” before “for a substantial part of book two”
—This is a necessary part of the sentence, clarifying why CZA was included! I did not authorize its omission.

16. P. 595, footnote 57, last line: “PL 20:1071-66”
—Restore correct reference: “PL 1071-1166”

17. P. 595, footnote 59, line 4: “(1916)”
—change to “[1916]” since it is already within parentheses

*18. P. 599, footnote 86, line 1: “Franc”
—add period at end; an abbreviation; should be “Franc.”

19. P. 599, footnote 86, last line: “Latin text Milan, ca. 1490 is found in Boninus Mombritius,”
—This is so messed up! It is the date of the publication of Mombritius’ edition! [The exact date of publication is unknown, hence the ca.] It was taken out of the proper place in the proofs I approved: in parentheses before the reprint date (now separated on p. 600!), and stuck here, as if it were a manuscript or medieval translation done ca. 1490!
—The only way that I can see not to disturb the pagination is to say something like: “Latin text published Milan, ca. 1490 by Boninus Mombritius,”

20. P. 600, footnote 86, last line: “Nicene council”
—should be “Nicene Council” with capital C

21. P. 600, footnote 88, line 2: “AAL”
—Should this be italicized? It was in the proofs I approved.
—It also occurs elsewhere in the chapter without italics at P. 610, footnote 142, line 3

22. P. 602, footnote 100
—The first paragraph of the note is also a complete quotation, like the second paragraph.
—Shouldn’t the first paragraph be fully indented like the second paragraph?

23. P. 608, top paragraph, line four: “plausible:”
—from here to the end of the paragraph “unconverted Jews.” all the semi-colons have been replaced with periods. This has the effect of separating them from the idea of plausibility indicated by the colon after “plausible”
—Restore all semi-colons (;) by replacing all periods (.) from “plausible:” to the end of the paragraph, fixing case as necessary.

24. P. 608, footnote 134, lines 10-11: “Cameron, “New Themes and Styles in Greek Literature,” 98,”
—I did not see the full bibliographic reference included anywhere in the chapter: Cameron, Averil. “New Themes and Styles in Greek Literature: Seventh-Eighth Centuries” in The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, volume I, edited by Averil Cameron and Lawrence I. Conrad, 81-105. Princeton, N.J.: The Darwin Press, Inc., 1992.

25. P. 609, 2nd paragraph, 3rd from last line: “must be baptized”
—I had “be baptized” and I want it back; there is a bit of ambiguity left that adding “must” removes, and seems to then be in conflict with footnote 139 (apparently no death for refusal).
—If necessary, “shall be baptized” is acceptable.

26. P. 611, top paragraph, third line: “executed for his missionary work”
—Restore “where he was apprehended” after “executed for his missionary work” so:
“executed for his missionary work where he was apprehended”
—This is not pleonastic: Azqir was arrested in Najran, then taken to the king, he is to be returned to Najran for his execution (to be made an example of there).

27. P. 614, footnote 159, lines 6-8: 3 ellipses are absent from the quotation!
—This is an extremely serious error. The ellipses were present in the proofs I was sent and approved.
— The restored text should read:  “…And concerning the baptism of … the kings of India [Himyar is called India in 90.71-78] and the Elmarits, that is the Nubians, and of what religion they had been formerly. … And the Indians, that is the Elmakurids [ = Elmarits?], were formerly Jews.”

28. P. 614, footnote 160, lines 3-4: An ellipsis is missing between “Menyelek:” and “A”
— The restored text should read: “The Queen of Sheba & Her Only Son Menyelek: … A Complete Translation of the Kebra Nagast”

29. P. 616, footnote 166, line 4:
—Possibly an extra space after the first parenthesis, before Panarion

30. P. 617,  3rd paragraph, line 1: “PC is a Christian work, since”
—This should read: “Since PC is a Christian work,”
—The meaning is completely changed from my intended meaning! The words were misplaced by whoever entered the changes on the proofs I approved.

31. P. 617, footnote 171, last line: “A Critical Examination of the Toledoth Jeshu.”
—Because, this is a thesis, it should not be in italics, but it should be in quotation marks.

*32. P. 619, footnote 181, last line: “(1.1.11-19[1.8-11])”
—add space between “-19” and “[1.8” thus: “(1.1.11-19 [1.8-11])”

33. P. 621, top paragraph, last four lines: starting from “contra Iudaeos literature:” all four verbs ‘till the end of the paragraph were changed from present tense to past tense
—I approved them in the present tense in order to show continuous characteristics of the genre. This sense is reduced with the past tense.
—Restore all four verbs to the present tense as follows: “contra Iudaeos literature: it grows out of mission to the Jews, and the arguments are based in part on previous such literature. These arguments are modified through debate, and the old literature and the new debate are combined in a new writing.”

34. P. 624, footnote 200, line 2
—Remove second (extra) quotation mark after “a dialogue with the Jews”

35. P. 625, set off quotation: 3 ellipses are missing
—Restore the 3 ellipses as follows: “But also I say this in no way due to a hesitation to investigate the scriptures according to the Jews, and to compare all ours with theirs, and to see the differences in them. Indeed … we have done this to a large extent …, struggling with their meaning in all the editions and their differences while striving so much more with the translation of the LXX …. And we strive”   / no more ellipses in the rest of the quote
—Very serious omissions.

36. P. 629, 3rd set off quotation: 3 ellipses are missing
—Restore the 3 ellipses as follows: “And even more does darkness befall me when also the Jews taunt us and behave insolently toward the children of our nation. It happened one day that a man who is called wise among the Jews, questioned me (1) …. All this argument I have written to you because the Jews pride themselves, saying, ‘It has been covenanted to us that we shall be gathered’ (5). … All this discourse I have written to you, …, because the Jew reproached the children of our nation” (8).
—Very serious omissions.

37. P. 630, footnote 219, last 2 lines: “by Paschalis Romanus, edited by Gilbert Dahan.)”
—I did not see the full bibliographic reference included anywhere in the chapter: Paschalis Romanus. “Paschalis Romanus: Disputatio contra Judeos,” edited by Gilbert Dahan. Recherches Augustiniennes 11 (1976), 161-213.

38. P. 631, top paragraph, lines 10-12: starting after “Here we see” the next two verbs were changed from present tense to past tense
—I approved them in the present tense in order to show continuous characteristics of the genre. This sense is reduced with the past tense.
—Restore both verbs to the present tense as follows: “Here we see that another contra Iudaeos work, a dialogue of an actual debate, is circulated widely among Gentile Christians soon after the event, and there is no connection with catechism.”

39. P. 633, footnote 229, line 6: “(1992)”
—change to “[1992]” since it is already within parentheses

40. P. 635, 2nd paragraph, line 10: “dialogues set in Egypt”
—Restore “or apparently there” after “dialogues set in Egypt” so: “dialogues set in Egypt or apparently there”
—the additional phrase is there because ADJ is not certainly Egyptian

41. P. 635, 2nd paragraph, line16: “rather than brute force”
—omit this added phrase; I would never use it, it’s overkill, and it’s quite pleonastic
—it will also allow room for the restoration immediately above

42. P. 635, footnote 237, next-to-last line: “(1)”
—change to “[1]” since it is already within parentheses

*43. P. 638, footnote 247, last line:
—Add page numbers: 2:1-98

44. P. 638, footnote 248, last line: “1.73-99, 2.69-92”
—change periods to colons thus: “1:73-99, 2:69-92”

45. P. 639, footnote 252: “PG 28.597-700”
—change period to colon thus: “PG 28:597-700”