Tertullian's Text of the New Testament Outside the Gospels
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
TERTULLIAN’S TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT OUTSIDE THE GOSPELS by BENJAMIN DOUGLAS HAUPT A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Philosophy, Theology, and Religion College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham January 2019 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This study examines Tertullian’s references to the New Testament outside the Gospels, in order to determine whether he was citing from a Greek or Latin copy of these writings. A new collection of these references was undertaken and is explained in the Appendix. The conclusion of the analysis is that Tertullian was quoting the New Testament writings using Greek exemplars and translating anew in most instances. Tertullian was one of the first Christians to have undertaken such translation work. It is proposed that Tertullian was participating in and influenced by a broad cultural-linguistic movement called the Second Sophistic. Latin writers like Cicero, Quintilian, Varro, and Apuleius were also participants, and their translation of Greek works into Latin likely formed Tertullian to become a literary translator. A contribution to textual criticism is offered in a textual analysis of selected references. The conclusion that Tertullian’s references are translations rather than copies of an extant Latin text is evidenced by the large proportion of singular readings which match no other known Latin version. Several readings among these references suggest an affiliation with a particular Greek manuscript and thus present a very early form of the Greek text. To Celina, Aidan, and Noah quae instituit Deus, etiam ipse custodit ... ut maritus sim, habeam oportet uxorem ... ut pater sim, filium habeo ... quae enim me faciunt Aduersus Praxean 10.3–4 Acknowledgements I could not have undertaken this project nor completed it without the generous assistance of many. Co-presenters and conference attendees at the Society of Biblical Literature, the Oxford Patristics Conference, and the North American Patristics Society provided helpful feedback on early drafts of portions of this dissertation. Prof. David Wilhite’s invitation to assist in the creation of a conference sectional and to submit a paper for publication was particularly formative. Fellow graduate students and research assistants at the University of Birmingham’s Institute of Textual Studies and Electronic Editing welcomed me into the community of textual criticism. Prof. David Parker graciously engaged my questions and musings during research seminars. My co-supervisor, Dr. Catherine Smith, provided support and direction in using nascent digital tools to aid in research. Prof. Hugh Houghton was a gift of a supervisor – patiently correcting my over-confident and erroneous assertions, returning my work with unbelievable efficiency, and yet managing to be careful and comprehensive in his engagement. I am hopeful that his gracious and yet knowledgeable, precise and yet encouraging approach to scholarship has formed me for future work. The community of Concordia Seminary made this study possible. Without the Seminary’s generous financial assistance and a study leave during fall semester 2018, this dissertation would never have come to fruition. The curiosity and well-wishes of my students constantly reminded me why I left parish ministry to take up teaching. My faculty colleagues were a constant source of support and encouragement. My co-workers in the library at Concordia not only helped locate difficult items but also kept the library in good working order during my absence as director. Conversations with Profs. David Maxwell, Mark Seifrid, and Jim Voelz were helpful in working through particularly challenging textual puzzles. Dr. Jeff Kloha first introduced me to the field of textual criticism, mentored me through my master’s thesis, and then became friend, neighbor and colleague when I joined Concordia’s faculty. His mentoring as Provost and his continuing friendship and conversation have set a course for my professional life. Friends and family provided joy and sometimes a welcome distraction during this project. Peter Nafzger, Travis Scholl, and my pastor Jeff Cloeter were as good a fellowship as anyone could need on such a journey. Pastor Greg Smith provided years of affirmation that the church is still interested in and benefited by the academy and higher learning. The good people of Christ Memorial Lutheran Church have been a nurturing faith family. My parents and brother have put up with me for a long time and still offer never-ending amounts of love and direction. My boys gave up loads of Daddy time to allow me to complete this project, and yet they were always ready to pick up where we last left off. Without my wife, however, I never would have undertaken or completed this project. Her selfless sacrifice, unending patience, and practical advice were the most decisive vote of confidence for this dissertation. CONTENTS Chapter One: Introduction: Literature Review and Methodology 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Literature Review 7 1.3 Need for a New Study 37 Chapter Two: Tertullian’s Cultural Background 2.1 Introduction 41 2.2 Tertullian’s Education 43 2.3 Tertullian and the Issue of Class 50 2.4 Translation Practices in Carthage and Rome 56 2.5 Tertullian’s Cultural, Linguistic, and Translation Practices 69 2.5.1 Tertullian’s Comments on Language 69 2.5.2 Tertullian’s Comments on Translation 75 2.5.3 Tertullian’s Practice of Translation 76 2.5.4 Tertullian and Greek Code-Switching 80 2.6 Conclusion 99 Chapter Three: Tertullian and the Bible 3.1 Introduction 101 3.2 Tertullian’s Attitude toward the Scriptures 104 3.3 Tertullian’s Material Bible 110 3.3.1 The Format of Tertullian’s Scriptures 111 3.3.2 Tertullian and the Canon 118 3.3.3 Tertullian’s Knowledge of Textual Variants 121 3.4 Tertullian the Exegete 124 Chapter Four: Characteristics of Tertullian’s Text of the NT in Each of His Works 4.1 Introduction 133 4.1.1 Methodology for Collecting References 134 4.1.2 Sources for Identifying References 136 4.1.3 Explanation of Appendix 137 4.1.4 Cautions for Using the Appendix and Data Tables 138 4.1.5 The Principal Manuscripts of Tertullian 140 4.1.5.1 Codex Agobardinus (A) 141 4.1.5.2 Codex Trecensis (T) 141 4.1.5.3 Codex Ottobonianus (O) 143 4.1.5.4 Codex Paterniacensis (P) 143 4.1.5.5 Codex Montepessulanus (M) 144 4.1.5.6 Codex Florentinus Magliabechianus (N) 144 4.1.5.7 Codex Florentinus Magliabechianus (F) 145 4.2 Early Works 146 4.2.1 Ad nationes (TE nat) 197 [CPL 2] 146 4.2.2 Ad martyras (TE mart) 197 [CPL 1] 147 4.2.3 Aduersus Iudaeos (TE Jud) 197 [CPL 33] 150 4.2.4 Apologeticum (TE ap) 197 [CPL 3] 153 4.2.5 De testimonio animae (TE test) ca. 198 [CPL 4] 158 4.3 Middle period works 159 4.3.1 De spectaculis (TE spec) 197-202 [CPL 6] 159 4.3.2 De idololatria (TE id) 198-202 [CPL23] 162 4.3.3 De oratione (TE or) 198-203 [CPL 7] 164 4.3.4 De baptismo (TE ba) 198-203 [CPL 8] 166 4.3.5 Ad uxorem (TE ux) 198-203 [CPL 12] 171 4.3.6 De praescriptione haereticorum (TE hae) 198-203 [CPL 5] 172 4.3.7 Scorpiace (TE sco) 203/04 [CPL 22] 173 4.3.8 De patientia (TE pat) pre-204 [CPL 9] 174 4.3.9 De paenitentia (TE pae) 204 [CPL 10] 175 4.3.10 Aduersus Hermogenem (TE Her) 204/05 [CPL 13] 176 4.3.11 De pallio (TE pall) 205 [CPL 15] 177 4.3.12 De cultu feminarum (TE cul) Bk 1: 205/06, Bk 2: 196/97 [CPL 11] 178 4.4 Montanist Writings 179 4.4.1 De carne Christi (TE car) 206 [CPL 18] 179 4.4.2 Aduersus Ualentinianos (TE Val) 206/07 [CPL 16] 180 4.4.3 De anima (TE an) 206/07 [CPL 17] 181 4.4.4 De resurrectione mortuorum (TE res) 206/07 [CPL 19] 182 4.4.5 Aduersus Marcionem (TE Marc) 207/11 [CPL 14] 184 4.4.6 De corona (TE cor) 208 [CPL 21] 187 4.4.7 De fuga in persecutione (TE fu) 208/09 [CPL 25] 188 4.4.8 De uirginibus uelandis (TE vg) 208/09 [CPL 27] 189 4.4.9 De exhortatione castitatis (TE cas) 208/09 [CPL 20] 190 4.4.10 Aduersus Praxean (TE Pra) 210/11 [CPL 26] 191 4.4.11 De pudicitia (TE pud) 210/11 [CPL30] 193 4.4.12 De ieiunio aduersus psychicos (TE je) 210/11 [CPL 29] 194 4.4.13 De monogamia (TE mon) 210/11 [CPL 28] 195 4.4.14 Ad Scapulam (TE Sca) 212 [CPL 24] 195 4.5 Conclusion 196 Chapter Five: Tertullian’s New Testament References Outside the Gospels 5.1 Introduction 203 5.1.1 Determining Biblical References 204 5.1.2 Translating Greek or Copying Latin? 205 5.1.3 Analyzing Translation Practices 206 5.1.4 Tools for Analysis 213 5.2.1 Acts 214 5.2.2 Romans 221 5.2.3 1 Corinthians 231 5.2.4 2 Corinthians 254 5.2.5 Galatians 259 5.2.6 Ephesians 263 5.2.7 Philippians 268 5.2.8 Colossians 271 5.2.9 1 Thessalonians 273 5.2.10 2 Thessalonians 275 5.2.11 1 Timothy 276 5.2.12 2 Timoty 281 5.2.13 Titus 282 5.2.14 Philemon 283 5.2.15 Hebrews 283 5.2.16 James 287 5.2.17 1 Peter 287 5.2.18 2 Peter 290 5.2.19 1 John 290 5.2.20 2 & 3 John 292 5.2.21 Jude 293 5.2.22 Apocalypse 293 5.3 Conclusion 297 Chapter Six: Conclusion 6.1 Summary 299 6.2 Avenues for Further Research 301 Appendix 303 Bibliography 305 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION & LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 Introduction Diese communicatio göttlicher und menschlicher idiomatum ist ein Grundgesetz und der Hauptschlüssel aller unsrer Erkenntnis und der ganzen sichtbaren haushaltung.