About a year ago I signed up for a database of abstracts/pdf of articles on Ben Sira/Sirach of the deuterocanonical books of the Bible. It's called Academia.com. My own publications are also in there, but usually the only ones I see for which they notify me are on agricultural credit from the 1970s, and not the ones on library topics from the 1990s. And occasionally, the database is really fishing, like "The name "N. Bruce" is mentioned in "Enzyme-Based Electrochemical Biosensors for Microfluidic Platforms to Detect Pharmaceutical Residues in Wastewater" uploaded to Academia. Not only I didn't write it, can't even read it!
But with the Bible search on Ben Sira, if I see something that looks interesting and click on that title, then my own search gets expanded. So today, I receive a notice that "138,701 papers on Academia discuss "History Of The Bible/Biblical Canon." I also noticed a chart that showed the topic of Bible textual studies had soared in the last 5 years. Must have been the Covid effect--lots of grad students sitting at home with nothing to do but read, research and write. The title that arrived in my mailbox was from The Textual History of the Bible, vol.1B and discusses disagreements among Christians about the deuterocanonical books (7 books in the O.T. not in the Protestant canon but in the other canons).Volume 1B provides detailed entries on the different primary translations (Greek, Aramaic, Syriac, Latin) and uniquely the secondary translations as well (Latin, Coptic, Ethiopic, Syriac, Armenian, Georgian, Christian Palestinian Aramaic, Old Slavonic, and Arabic) most of which were sourced from the Greek. No wonder we have over 35,000 different Protestant denominations--they all say their version of the Bible is right, and thus we get the dust up between the Bishop and the President about her sermon. She has a pulpit, and he has Truth Social.
Posts
