The Significance of P66 and P75 for Methodology in NT Textual Criticism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PAPYRUS BODMER II AMD PAPYRUS BODMER XIV-XV FOR METHODOLOGY IK NEW TESTAMENT TEXTUAL CRITICISM Gordon Donald Fee A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Religion) August 1966 UNIVERSITY Or SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TMI OHAOUATC SCHOOL UNivKRsmrpANK LMANOELf*. CALIFORNIA 90007 This dissertation, written by GORDON DONALD FEE under the direction of h£&.-Disscrtation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Dean D*u AiigagtJjIOJL· ΌΜΜΙΤΤΕΕ Jte^CX TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE , I. INTRODUCTION . ' . 1 She Problem ...... 3 ! i Statement of Purpose ...... · 12 | Importance of the Study ........... 13 Organization of the Remainder of the Study · · 16 II. THE PROBLEM OF METHOD IN ANALYZING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS . 18 Codex Slnaltlcus In the Gospel of John . 21 An Historical Sketch ........ 25 Attempts at Refinement of Method 29 Codez Slnaltlcus in John 4 . 4l Codex Slnaltlcus in John 1-9 . 51 John 1-3 55 John 5-8 . 59 The End of the Western Text in Κ ..... 68 Conclusions . 71 III, AN ANALYSIS OF THE TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIPS OF P66 73 Previous Analyses of ?66 ··········· 73 Textual Relationships of P66 . 83 John 1-5 85 John 6-7 9* John 8-9 ...... 105 11 - - . t John 10-14 ....... ... ..... 110! John 15-21 112 Coneluelone ......... ·· 116 TEXTUAL AND SCRIBAL CHARACTERISTICS OF P66 . 118 Textual Tendencies of P66 Where It Disagrees with Its Basic Textual Tradition 120 Word order · 122 Conjunctions 132 Variations in verb fores 135 Personal pronouns 144 The article before proper nouns ...... 145 Miscellaneous variations · 162 The Corrections of P66 167 The nature of the corrections ....... 167 Textual relationships of the corrections · · 173 Textual characteristics of the corrections · 184 THE TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIPS OP P75 IN THE GOSPEL OF ICKE 192 P75 and Β in Luke 10 194 P75 and Β in the Reeainder of Luke 203 Textual Characteristics of P75 and Β 213 Conclusions ..·..·.·..·..··.. 220 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF P66 AND P75 FOR THE PROBLEM OF METHOD IN NEW TESTAMENT TEXTUAL CRITICISM . 223 ill P66 and P75 &nd the Role of External Evidence in Textual Criticise -'. ...... 226 Singular readings and original text .... 229 Author's style and original text 233 The evaluation of variants where internal questions are indecisive . · . · 239 P66 and P75 and Early Textual Recension ... 245 The Neutral texttype as recension 247 Recension and texttype 252 P75 and the Neutral texttype as recension . 253 Origen and the Keutral texttype as recension 257 P66 and the Neutral texttype as recension . 259 The Keutral texttype and the "original text" 26l Conclusions: "Reasoned" Eclecticism as a Valid Text Critical Method 264 APPENDIX I. Variation-units and Singular Readings in John * ' 273 APPENDIX II. Corrections of P66 Where the Original Text Has Singular or Sub-singular Readings . 282 APPENDIX IH. Disagreements Between P75 and Codex Β In Luke 286 BIBLIOGRAPHY 298 Ir LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAOB I· Ruber of Disagreements Between Early KSS In John 4 43 II. Agreements in John 4 where at Least Two KSS (not Including TR) Agree Against the Rest · . 44 : XH· Percentage of Agreements in John 1-8, Based on 320 Variation-units, where at Least Two KSS (not Including TR) Agree Against the Rest . 52 17. Percentage of Agreements in John 9, Based on 51 Variation-units, where at Least Two KSS (not Including TR) Agree Against the Rest .... 53 V. Chapter by Chapter Percentages of Agreement Between P66 and Other Early KSS 86 VI. Soee Composite Percentages of Agreement Between P66 and Other Early KSS 88 VII. KS Evidence of the Use of the Article Before Ίησοΰς in Various Jobannine Constructions . 154 VIII. Number of Disagreements Between Early KSS in Luke 10 196 IX. Percentage of Agreements in Luke 10 at 70 Units of Variation 197 X. Chapter by Chapter Percentages of Agreements in Luke Between P75 and Other Early KSS .... 204 • i XI. Singular and Sub-eingular Readings of P75 in Luke Listed According to Types of Variation from Codex Β 206 TTT. Singular and Sub-singular Readings of Β in Luke Listed According to Types of Variations from P75 207 XIII. Disagreements Between P75 and Β in Luke Where Each Has Important MS Support Listed According to Types of Variation 208 vi LIST OP FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. A Sample Page of the Collation Used in this Dissertation 40 vii 1IST OP ABBREVIATIONS BA The Biblical Archaeologist BibSac Blbllotheca Sacra BibTrans The Bible Translator BZ Biblische Zeitschrlft CEQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly ExpT Expository Times HTR Harvard Theological Review JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JTS Journal of Theological Studies MS Manuscript MSS Manuscripts NEB New English Bible NT New Testament NTA New Testament Abstracts New Testament Studies NTS Novum Testamentum NovT RB Revue Biblique RevTheoPhil Revue de Thoologie et de Philosophie RSV Revised Standard Version ThIZ Theologische Literaturzeitung TR Textus Receptus WH Westcott-Hort ZNV Zeitschrlft fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft viii LIST OF TEXTUAL SIOIA The following list includes only the more important uanuscripts cited in this study. The data for other manu scripts cited may be found in Kurt Aland, Kurzgefasste Liste der griechlschen Handschrlftcn des Neuen Testaments (Berlin, 1963). : \ I. GREEK MANUSCRIPT ! \ A· Papyri Century P5 . British MuBeum Papyrus 782 III P45 Chester Beatty Papyrus I III P46 Chester Beatty Papyrus II III 266 \ Papyrus Bodmer II II.Ill P72 \ Papyrus Bodmer VII-IX III P75 •Papyrus Bodmer XIV-XV II.Ill B. Uncials \ Κ Codex Sinaiticus IV A Codex Alexandrinus V Β Codex Vaticanus IV C Codex Ephraemi rescriptus V D Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis V.YI L Codex Regius VIII Τ Codex Borgianue V V Codex Vashingtonianus I IV .V e Codex Koridethianus DC ix Η Codex Zacynthlos VIII \ Τ Codex Laurensls VHI.DC 1 Minusculeβ 1 Basel, Α.Η. IV 2 XII 13 Parle, Or, 50 nil 28 Paris, Gr. 379 χ* 33 Parle, Cr. 14 n 38 Paris, CoiBl. Or. 200 ΧΠΙ 118 Oxford, Auct. D. infr. 2. 17 ΠΠ 209 Venice, 394 XIV 565 Leningrad, Gr. 53 IX 579 Paris, Or· 97 XHI 66ο Berlin, Or. Qu. 66 xucti 700 London, Kgerton 2610 XI 892 London, Add. 33277 X 1241 Sinai, 260 XII λ Family l (Codices 1 118 131 209 1582 2193) Ψ Family 13 (Codices 13 69 124 230 346 543 788 826 828 983 1689) II. VERSIONS A. Old Latin a Codex Vercellensis IV b Codex Veronensls · V e Codex Colbertinus XII • Codex Palatlnus t Codex Brixianus Ύ1 Codex Corbelensls T.VI 1 Codex Yindobonensls ¥1 J Codex Saretlanus V 1 Codex Rebdigeranus TO q Codex Konacensis VI r1 Codex Usseriant» VH Other versional eigla «eth The Ethloplc version *m The Armenian version to The Bohairie (Horthern) Coptic version bc£ The Bohairie Coptic KS edited by Thompson, dating circa 350-375 (see Bibliography) it Itala - The Old latin KSS collectively sa The Sahidic (Southern) Coptic version »y The Syriac versions sy6 The Cureton KS of the Old Syriac version sy8 The Mount Sinai KS of the Old Syriac version gfnBg The margin of the Bare lean Syriac version «yP*1 The Palestinian Syriac version eyP The Peshitta Syriac version vg The latin Vulgate xi j ** i I CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In recent years it has often been observed that the proper task of the New Testament textual critic is twofold. The first task is the attempt to discover the original text of the New Testament writings themselves. This is the search for "the New Testament in the ' Original * Greek* (even if the critics' results must be given the uncertainty of quotation marks). The second task Is to interpret the variations of the text within the context of the history of the Church. This includes, among other things, the discovery and evaluation of the theological Tendenz of textual variation. Although the quest for th2 original text has usually been acknowledged as the first task of textual criticism, the present possibility of the success of such a quest has had varying degrees of acceptance. Some, to be sure, have Intimated that for all practical purposes the ala of the quest has been achieved. Joachim Jeremias, for example, suggested, "One can say, without exaggeration, that this 1 2 chapter In research is essentially concluded and that we today have attained the best possible Greek text of the New «ι 2 Testament. Manfred Karnetzki, on the other hand, has suggested the abandonment of this quest altogether: Rather than to view the variations as corruptions of a normative, sacred text which needs to be restored, the critic ought to study them as a reflection of living tradition.3 Indeed, it was in observation of these two trends that Ounther Zuntz had previously bemoaned: After centuries of fruitful work in the field of textual criticism we seem to be faced with an impasse. Many students comfortably pin their faith on the achievements of previous generations; others— 1The Lord's Prayer (Philadelphia, 1964), p. 7. Prom the translation by John Reumann of Das Vater-Unser lm Lichte der Neueren Forschung (Stuttgart, 1962). 2wTextgeschichte als iiberlieferungsgeschichte," ZNW, XLVII (1956), 170-180. 3Ibid., p. 170. Cf. Kenneth V. Clark's 1965 presi dential address before the Society of Biblical Literature ("The Theological Relevance of Textual Variation in Current Criticism of the Greek New Testament," JBL, LXXXV [1966], 1-16) where he reflects something of this point of view: "Such scribal freedom suggests that the gospel text was little more stable than an oral tradition, and that we may be pursuing the retreating mirage of the 'original text'" (P.