Charles — Apocrypha & Pseudepigrapha Vol. I — Section 421
The reading, its source, and a dependable way back.
Work: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament — Vol. I
Permanent passage identifier
hsu_50fabcf8-fed2-48ed-bf2a-110f6b4cee33This identity belongs to this edition’s reading. Cross-witness correspondence awaits review.
R. H. Charles ed. 1913, Vol. I
Excerpt · the full reading remains in Scripture Library.
and erroneous in its premises.° (v) If attempts such as Marshall’s and Resch’s more laborious studies ® are rightly passed over, along with the oral hypothesis of Gieseler and Dr. A. Wright, by New Testament scholars as being inadequate and useless contributions to the solution of the Synoptic Problem, hypotheses such as this of Marshall’s and Bickell’s* must also fail in the case of Tobit, and for the same fundamental reason. In the case of RS and RY especially, and also in that of non-Greek versions of Tobit, as in the Synoptic Gospels, the problem to be solved is not simply that of th…
- Source
- R. H. Charles, ed., 1913 — Internet Archive
- Rights
- Public-domain-era 1913 edition; unrestricted Internet Archive derivative required
- Reading language
- English
- Completeness
- Not established for this edition
- Review
- Review status not established by this card
Work translation availability: HSLT — No published edition · HSRT — No published edition. A translation of this Work may not cover this exact passage.
Evidence Intelligence
Know what kind of evidence you are looking at.
Helpful Saints keeps direct biblical text, language evidence, ancient witnesses, historical context, research models, and open questions visibly distinct.Direct Biblical Text
The explicit wording and literary context of canonical Scripture.
Original-Language Evidence
Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, morphology, lemmas, semantic range, and textual comparison.
Ancient Witness
Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish literature, and early Christian writings—clearly classified.
Historical Context
Geography, material culture, chronology ranges, institutions, customs, and reception history.
Research Model
A configured chronology, theological synthesis, typological pattern, or proposed relationship.
Open Question
Evidence is incomplete, debated, or insufficient for a settled conclusion.