PastoralEpistles.com

So, I've been reading Second Clement lately. Today, while looking at 2Cl 3 in Holmes' Apostolic Fathers (Amazon.com), and I noticed an interesting—in light of 1Ti 2.4—variant. Convienently, we only have Second Clement extant in two Greek editions (and one Syriac). So I'm assuming that Holmes has been exhaustive in his variants (outside of orthographical issues) between Codex Alexandrinus (5th century) and Codex Heirosolymitanus (9th century).

Here's Holmes' text (with interesting section in bold):

Τοσοῦτον οὖν ἔλεος ποιήσαντος αὐτοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς—πρῶτον μέν, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες τοῖς νεκροῖς θεοῖς οὐ θύομεν καὶ οὐ προσκυνοῦμεν αὐτοῖς, ἀλλὰ ἔγνωμεν διʼ αὐτοῦ τὸν πατέρα τῆς ἀληθείας—τίς ἡ γνῶσις ἡ πρὸς αὐτόν, ἢ τὸ μὴ ἀρνεῖσθαι διʼ οὗ ἔγνωμεν αὐτόν; (2Cl 3.1, Holmes Greek)
Seeing, then, that he has shown us such mercy—first of all, that we who are living do not sacrifice to dead gods, nor do we worship them, but through him have come to know the Father of truth—what else is knowledge with respect to him if it is not refusing to deny him through whom we have come to know him? (2Cl 3.1, Holmes English)

Holmes follows Alexandrinus (which is usually, apart from orthography, a smart idea, according to none other than J.B. Lightfoot). But note Heirosolymitanus' reading:

Τοσοῦτον οὖν ἔλεος ποιήσαντος αὐτοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς—πρῶτον μέν, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες τοῖς νεκροῖς θεοῖς οὐ θύομεν καὶ οὐ προσκυνοῦμεν αὐτοῖς, ἀλλὰ ἔγνωμεν διʼ αὐτοῦ τὸν πατέρα τῆς ἀληθείας—τίς ἡ γνῶσις της αληθειας, ἢ τὸ μὴ  αὐτόν διʼ οὗ ἔγνωμεν; (2Cl 3.1, Heirosolymitanus)

Haven't thought much about the deletion/pronoun shift at the end of the verse, but note how "knowledge concerning him" in Alexandrinus is "knowledge concerning the truth" in Heirosolymitanus. That evokes 1Ti 2.4:

ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν. (1Ti 2.4, NA27)
who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.(1 Ti 2:4, ESV)

Of course, there are some explanations for the Heirosolymitanus reading. της αληθειας echoes the earlier phrase, "father of the truth"; it could be a scribe's errant duplication of that phrase. But that doesn't necessarily account for the balance of changes, does it? The balance of the changes in this verse, I'd guess, force consideration of a deliberate change, not an errant one. That is, it seems to me the balance of the changes make the first change work. In that light, who knows which one is the better reading? In this case, we have the "majority rules" trump card — the Syriac witness supports Holmes' reading.

 I scanned the rest of the variants to see if there might be some gnostic vibe to the differences in Greek editions, but didn't see any. My guess is that Holmes (and Lake, and Lightfoot) is right.

But still interesting to think about nonetheless. It also goes to show why familiarity with period texts (in this case, Apostolic Fathers and the New Testament) helps so much when thinking about text-critical issues.

Posted by Rick Brannan

I blogged about this back in May and fully meant to follow up then, but life as a new father has been busy. Here are some background posts:

• Treu Papyrus 3605 (NT 0259): 1Ti 1.4-5, 6-7
• P. Berlin 13977 (NT 0262): 1Ti 1.15-16

Those posts only have excerpts of the study I did on the variants in those passages and what the parchments might say about them. My fuller notes are in this PDF file: Treu Papyri.pdf (536.29 KB). I should've posted it two months ago, but oh well.

Of course, I'm interested in any feedback anyone might have. Thanks!

Posted by Rick Brannan

A few days ago I blogged about NT 0259 (P. Berlin 3065) which covers 1Ti 1.4-5, 6-7. Today I'll blog a bit about NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977). According to Peter Head (contra Elliott) these fragments are parchments, not papyrus. I don't have the experience to tell the difference, but I trust Dr. Head's judgment on such matters.

First, an image of NT 0262. According to Treu, this is a 7th century MS. The below is a digital photo of a plate in Kurt Treu, “Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung”, Archiv für Papyrusforschung 18, 1966.

NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977), 1Ti 1.15-16

Next, Treu's transcription of 0262 (P. Berlin 13977). Note the unique orthography. Actually, it's pretty wacky and is heavily phoneticised.

NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977), 1Ti 1.15-16. Transcription by K. Treu

Treu also provides a normalisation of the transcription. Below is a table that compares the transcription with the normalisation. Treu's normalisation matches the NA27 letter-for-letter. The bold areas in the left column note major orthographical deviations (i.e., big-time mis-spellings).

NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977), 1Ti 1.15-16; transcription and normalisation

πιστος or ανθροπινος?

The phrase πιστος ο λογος is formulaic in the Pastorals. It occurs 5x (in NA/UBS) though instances in 1Ti 1.15 and 3.1 are debated; some witnesses have ανθροπινος ο λογος in 1Ti 1.15 and/or 3.1. Thus the reading of 0262 (P. Berlin 13977) may shed some light on the problem.

Treu’s reconstruction of the first word in 0262 (P. Berlin 13977) aligns with NA27. Elliott, not even mentioning the earliest and best MSS that support πιστος, reads ανθροπινος here and in 1Ti 3.1. Lock, in his 1924 ICC volume on the Pastorals, also reads ανθροπινος in 1Ti 1.15 and 3.1.* Tasker, in the Greek text of the New English Bible, reads πιστος in 1Ti 1.15 but ανθροπινος in 1Ti 3.1.** Lock and Elliott treat the two readings (1Ti 1.15 and 3.1) together though the evidence for each reading is not the same. Textual evidence for the variant in 1.15 is scant and only reflected in a handful of Latin witnesses; evidence for the variant in 3.1 is marginally better with only one Greek witness (the original hand of D) and a smattering of Latin witnesses.

0262 (P. Berlin 13977) does not testify to the whole word, but based on Treu’s reconstruction, it witnesses πιστος. The hand is not a well-practiced hand, and it is difficult to discern the –τος of πιστος. Help comes in the first line of column II, where προτος is witnessed. Comparing the –τος in both instances, one can make out the –τος at the start of column I. The strokes can be confirmed again by comparing with Χριστος in column I line 3. Unfortunately, the papyrus contains no –νος sequence (ανθροπι-νος) to compare against for complete verification.

Thus all indications are that 0262 (P. Berlin 13977) supports the commonly-accepted reading of πιστος ο λογος in 1Ti 1.15.

* Lock, W. (1924). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Pastoral epistles (I & II Timothy and Titus) (xxxvi). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

** R.G.V. Tasker. New English Bible Greek Text.

Posted by Rick Brannan

I blogged a little while back about papyri with content from First Timothy. I've found some time to poke around the articles. Jim West has graciously agreed to help me by translating the relevant sections from German into English; when that material is available I'll post it on the blog as well.

But I simply couldn't wait any longer and had to do some blogging about this. So here is P3605 from Kurt Treu's article:

Kurt Treu, “Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung”, Archiv für Papyrusforschung 18, 1966. p. 36.

This papyrus fragment is from the 6th or 7th century. Below I've typed Treu's transcription and have presented it as an image to preserve formatting, etc.

Perhaps the most interesting reading in the papyri is οικονομιαν in line 2. P3605 supports the NA27 reading, against J.K. Elliott who here follows the reading of D’s first hand and Irenaeus, οικοδομην.* Elliott rejects οικονομιαν, contending that it came about as a replacement for οικοδομην. He bases his judgment on the list of atticisms found in Phrynichus** which contains οικοδομη (οικοδομημα) as objectionable. Thus, reasons Elliott, scribes replaced οικοδομην with the less objectionable (and fitting NT/PE style) οικονομιαν (cf. Tt 1.7 and also Col 1.25; Eph 1.10, 3.2; 1Co 9.17).

But Elliott’s reasoning—reject the word because it is on a list of atticisms—is as arbitrary as rejecting a reading because it is the longer reading or because it is not the most difficult reading. These are guidelines that come about as a result of witnessed trends, not hard-and-fast rules. The whole picture must be examined, and the quality and witness of MSS supporting οικονομιαν (Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and several other uncials: FGKLPH) must also contribute to the decision. P3605 supports that already overwhelming evidence.

I've been working through all variants I can find for this section of text (largely from Treu's article, Elliott's work in the Pastorals, NA27 and Tischendorf) and will have a PDF with discussions like on these variants available for download at some future point.

Also, in the hopefully not-too-distant future I'll blog about one more reading in P13977 (1Ti 1.15-16) and provide a transcription of that papyri as well.

* Elliott, J.K. The Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus. (Studies and Documents 26). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1968. p. 19.

** For Phrynichus’ list, see Chrys C. Caragounis, The Development of Greek and the New Testament: Morphology, Syntax, Phonology and Textual Transmission. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. pp. 125-137.

Posted by Rick Brannan

I previously mentioned I'd located a copy of the following:

Title: ARCHIV FÜR PAPYRUSFORSCHUNG und verwandte Gebiete. Begründet v. U. Wilcken. Band 18.
Description: Hrsg. v. Fr. Zucker. Leipzig, Teubner, 1966. Gr.-8vo. 2 Bl., 122 S., 1 Bl., 6 Tafeln. OKart. (unaufgeschnitten). (OP 0006) Enthält u.a.: E. Wipszycka: Das Textilhandwerk und der Staat im römischen Ägypten.- K. Treu: Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung.- R. Koerner: Eine griechisch-christliche Grabinschrift aus Nubien.- Ders.: Eine Weihinschrift aus der Zeit Ptolemaios V. sowie ein ausführliches Urkundenrefarat des Herausgebers.

This was originally mentioned in J.K. Elliott's text-critical work on the Pastorals; Luke Timothy Johnson further mentions it in a footnote, though he also mentions he was unable to find a copy. Thanks to the magic of the internet, I was able to locate a copy and my curiosity got the best of me.

Today's mail brought the journal from a bookseller in Germany. Treu's article publishes a number of NT papyri, some of which are in Aland's Kurzgefaßte Liste, others of which aren't (at least as of 1966, the journal publication date).

Two of these papyri -- neither on Aland's list -- witness First Timothy.

• P3605: 1Ti 1.4-7. From Fayyum area. 6/7th century
• P13977: 1Ti 1.15-16. ca. 7th century

An unexpected surpise -- there's even a plate with an image of P13977. The image quality isn't great, but it's better than nothing. There are transcriptions along with brief apparatus and discussion in Treu's article.

There is nothing earth-shattering in these papyri, though the orthography in P13977 is crazy -- like some ancient version of "hooked on phonics". I'll blog in the future on each of them; no real time to do so right now. I'll see what I can squeeze in over the next while.

Update (2007-05-21): I sent an email to Peter Head (Evangelical Textual Criticism) to refer him to subsequent posts on this material and hopefully get a little more information. He kindly responds:

Just a note that P. Berlin 3605 is NT 0259 and P. Berlin 13977 is 0262. So they are both in Aland, KL (the 1994 edition anyway), but are obviously on parchment, not papyrus (despite their location in the Papyrussammlung!).

Thanks, Dr. Head!

Posted by Rick Brannan

You may remember me blogging about what I called "the mystery papyrus" earlier. J.K. Elliott cites it once; it supposedly contains witness to 1Ti 1.3-5 and 15-16.

My curiosity got the best of me. I did some research and have located and ordered a copy of the edition that contains Kurt Treu's article:

Title: ARCHIV FÜR PAPYRUSFORSCHUNG und verwandte Gebiete. Begründet v. U. Wilcken. Band 18.
Description: Hrsg. v. Fr. Zucker. Leipzig, Teubner, 1966. Gr.-8vo. 2 Bl., 122 S., 1 Bl., 6 Tafeln. OKart. (unaufgeschnitten). (OP 0006) Enthält u.a.: E. Wipszycka: Das Textilhandwerk und der Staat im römischen Ägypten.- K. Treu: Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung.- R. Koerner: Eine griechisch-christliche Grabinschrift aus Nubien.- Ders.: Eine Weihinschrift aus der Zeit Ptolemaios V. sowie ein ausführliches Urkundenrefarat des Herausgebers.

I'm hoping I can fight through the German to get to the good stuff. I'll report when I know more (the book is on its way from Germany). And I'll certainly post a transcription of the papyrus, assuming Treu's article has that information in such form.

Posted by Rick Brannan

J.K. Elliott, in his The Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, writes the following about the MS support for the Pastorals:

Two papyri, about 24 uncials and over 500 cursives read part or the whole of the Pastorals. (Elliott 13)

He further notes the Papyri are P32 (Titus 1.11-15, 2.3-8) and P61 (Titus 3.1-5, 8-11, 14-15). This is all well and good; we know all about these.

He then mentions in passing: "Treu knows papyri which include 1Ti 1.4-7, 15-16." (Elliott 13). The note to Treu refers back to the following:

K. Treu, 'Archiv fur Papyrusforshung', vol. 18, 1966.

He then lists the following in his bibliography:

K. TREU: "Neue Neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung" in 'Archiv fur Papyrusforschung' Vol. 18. Leipzig (1966).

Elliott then goes on to cite "Pap. 3605 published by Treu" in the apparatus on 1Ti 1.4, but that appears to be the only citation of Treu in the apparatus (after a quick survey of Elliott's notes on 1.4-7, 15-16). He gives no info on date or provenance of the papyrus.

I find the content of this mystery papyrus (mystery papyri?) interesting. 1Ti 1.5 is fairly important in the scope of First Timothy. And 1Ti 1.15 is the first "trustworthy saying" (is it πιστος or ανθρωπινος?) and v. 16 follows this with Paul's explanation of its importance. I'd love to see earlier witnesses of these verses (if, of course, the mystery papyri prove to be early, which is not a sure thing).

Anyone know anything about these mystery 'papyri'? Date and/or provenance? And are there transcriptions or photos of it anywhere?

Posted by Rick Brannan

A recent trip up north brought me to the very excellent library of the Vancouver School of Theology on the University of British Columbia campus.

Whilst browsing the shelves, I ran across a book I've been looking for for years: J.K. Elliott's The Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus. This is vol 36 in the University of Utah's Studies and Documents series. It was published in 1968.

I've seen this title referred to in footnotes in several commentaries, studies and other monographs, but have been unable to track it down. Now that I have, I'm glad I did. The monograph is a portion of Elliott's doctoral work. He uses his own "eclectic" methodology to establish his own text of the Pastoral Epistles. He interacts with a number of MSS, and what one ends up with is a textual commentary (from his eclectic point of view) on the Pastorals. Additionally, the introduction is a short but very well written guide to his methodology.

And the appendices are fairly fun too. Appendix 6 has several lists that show where Elliott's readings are in agreement and at variance with published editions (Westcott/Hort, TR, Tischendorf, Tregelles, etc.) and is concluded with a list of all of his unique readings (against the editions he checked) along with the MSS that provide the textual evidence for the unique reading. For example, in 1Ti 1.4 [Westcott-Hort], he accepts οἰκοδομην over οἰκονομιαν. No other edition (at least in 1968) took that reading. But he does, and he explains why.

An interesting follow-up will be to examine his unique readings with UBS4/NA27 and see if the UBS/NA has taken up any of his readings.

Update: I just scanned the 67 listed unique readings against NA27; nary a one of them is used in NA27. Most of Elliott's readings have to do with word order, orthography, adding/deleting a conjunction or adding/deleting an article. Very few would actually change the sense of the text, and those only slightly.

I hope to blog on his 'eclectic' approach over at my personal blog (ricoblog) at some point. (Update [2007-03-26]: I've begun this series, see the bottom of the post for further links) One unique aspect is that MS 'quality' is only one of a number of factors. Readings supported in as little as one MS or even one early version, in Elliott's methodology, may be considered as 'original' if other factors look good. In other words, there is no automatic veto if a reading is poorly attested -- especially if that reading scores well in other areas examined.

Just to say: If you're examining the Greek text of the Pastorals in any depth, you may consider locating Elliott's work. Best to check a well-stocked theological library!

Posted by Rick Brannan