New Testament Text and Language : A Sheffield Reader [1 ed.] 9780567593801, 9781850757955

Citation preview

New Testament Text and

Language

This page intentionally left blank

The Biblical Seminar 44

NE TESTAMENT

TEXT AND LANGUAGE

edited by

Stanley E. Porter & Craig A. Evans

Sheffield Academic Press

Copyright © 1997 Sheffield Academic Press Published by Sheffield Academic Press Ltd Mansion House 19KingfieldRoad Sheffield S119AS England

Typeset by Sheffield Academic Press and Printed on acid-free paper in Great Britain by Cromwell Press Melksham, Wiltshire

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 1-85075-795-X

CONTENTS Preface to the Series Abbreviations List of Contributors

7 9 13

TEXT CARROLL D. OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts— The International Project on the Text of Acts

17

The Presence and Significance of Lukanisms in the 'Western' Text of Acts

34

The Latin Column in Codex Bezae

52

A 'Dictation Theory' of Codex Bezae

66

Textual Variants and Theology: A Study of the Galatians Text of Papyrus 46

81

The 26th Edition of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece: A Limited Examination of its Apparatus

92

THOMAS C. GEER, JR

R. SHELDON MACKENZIE DAVID PARKER

HOWARD ESHBAUGH STAN LARSON

LANGUAGE R.MCL. WILSON Of Words and Meanings J. EUGENE BOTHA Style in the New Testament: The Need for Serious Reconsideration

DAVID S. NEW

The Injunctive Future and Existential Injunctions in the New Testament

107

114

130

6

New Testament Text and Language

AJ.M. WEDDERBURN Some Observations on Paul's Use of the Phrases 'in Christ' and 'with Christ'

145

What Does it Mean to be 'Saved by Childbirth' (1 Timothy 2.15)?'

160

The Roots and Development of the mere- Word Group as Faith Terminology

176

The Case against the Synonymity of Morphe and Eikon

191

The Origin of Paul's Use of TccaSayoyyoc; for the Law

201

The Meaning of Parakletos

207

STANLEY E. PORTER DENNIS R. LINDSAY DAVE STEENBURG tA.T. HANSON

KENNETH GRAYSTON tCOLIN HEMER

emo'uaioc;

222

PIETER W. VAN DER HORST

Notes on the Aramaic Background of Luke 2.41-52

235

RANDALL BUTH

Hebrew Poetic Tenses and the Magnificat tF.F. BRUCE The Full Name of the Procurator Felix

tCOLIN HEMER

240 256

The Name of Felix Again

259

Mark 3.17 Bovepeye|i and Popular Etymology

263

On Methodology in the Study of the Targums and their Chronology

267

RANDALL BUTH

STEPHEN A. KAUFMAN MAX WILCOX

The Promise of the 'Seed' in the New Testament and the Targumim Index of References Index of Authors

275 294 307

PREFACE TO THE SERIES

This Series, of which New Testament Text and Language is one, collects what the Series editors believe to be the best articles on the topic published in the first 50 issues (1978-1993) of Journal for the Study of the New Testament. Founded in 1978, with one issue in its inaugural year, JSNT was produced from 1979 to 1990 in three issues a year, and then, from 1991 to the present, in four issues a year. The continuing success of the journal can be seen in several ways: by its increasing circulation, by its increased publication schedule, by its fostering of a significant supplement series, which has now reached its 130th volume (JSNT Supplement Series), by its public exposure and influence within the scholarly community, and, most of all, by the quality of the essays it publishes. This volume contains a representative group of such articles on a specific area of New Testament studies. Once it was decided that such a Series of volumes should be issued, the question became that of how the numerous important articles were going to be selected and presented. The problem was not filling the volumes but making the many difficult choices that would inevitably exclude worthy articles. In the end, the editors have used various criteria for determining which articles should be reprinted here. They have gathered together articles that, they believe, make significant contributions in several different ways. Some of the articles are truly ground-breaking, pushing their respective enquiry into new paths and introducing new critical questions into the debate. Others are assessments of the critical terrain of a particular topic, providing useful and insightful analyses that others can and have built upon. Others still are included because they are major contributions to an on-going discussion. Even though back issues of JSNT art still in print and these essays are available in individual issues of the journal, it is thought that this kind of compilation could serve several purposes. One is to assist scholars who wish to keep up on developments outside their areas of specialist research or who have been away from a topic for a period of time and wish to

8

New Testament Text and Language

re-enter the discussion. These volumes are designed to be representatively selective, so that scholars can gain if not a thorough grasp of all of the developments in an area at least significant insights into major topics of debate in a field of interest. Another use of these volumes is as textbooks for undergraduates, seminarians and even graduate students. For undergraduates, these volumes could serve as useful readers, possibly as supplementary texts to a critical introduction, to provide a first exposure to and a sample of critical debate. For seminary students, the same purpose as for undergraduates could apply, especially when the seminarian is beginning critical study of the New Testament. There is the added use, however, that such material could provide guidance through the argumentation and footnotes for significant research into a New Testament author or topic. For graduate students, these volumes could not only provide necessary background to a topic, allowing a student to achieve a basic level of knowledge before exploration of a particular area of interest, but also serve as good guides to the detailed critical work being done in an area. There is the further advantage that many of the articles in these volumes are models of how to make and defend a critical argument, thereby providing useful examples for those entering the lists of critical scholarly debate. While some of the contributors may have altered their positions, or at least have moved further along in their opinions—it is often dangerous to accept any scholarly opinion as definitive—we believe that there is still much of merit in the variety of positions represented in this volume. Many more articles could and probably should be reprinted in further volumes, but this one and those published along with it must for now serve as an introduction to these topics, at least as they were discussed in JSNT. The editors would like to thank both Ted Goshulak, Reference Librarian for Trinity Western University's Marion Alloway Library, and Wendy Porter for assistance in tracking down many obscure bibliographical references. Craig A. Evans Trinity Western University Langley, B.C. Canada

Stanley E. Porter Roehampton Institute London England

ABBREVIATIONS AB AGJU AnBib ANRW ANTF ASV

ATR BAGD BDB

BETL Bib BJRL BNTC BR BTB BZ CBQ CChr CIL CJT ConBNT CSEL DTT EHPhr EncJud EPRO ETL EvQ Exp ExpTim FFNT

Anchor Bible Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums Analecta biblica Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung American Standard Version Anglican Theological Review W. Bauer, W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich and F.W. Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament F. Brown, S.R. Driver and C A. Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Biblica Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester Black's New Testament Commentaries Biblical Research Biblical Theology Bulletin Biblische Zeitschrift Catholic Biblical Quarterly Corpus Christianorum Corpus inscriptionum latinarum Canadian Journal of Theology Coniectanea biblica, New Testament Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum Dansk teologisk tidsskrift Etudes d'histoire et de philosophic religieuses Encyclopaedia Judaica Etudes preliminaires aux religions orientales dans 1'empire Romain Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses Evangelical Quarterly The Expositor Expository Times Foundations and Facets: New Testament

10

New Testament Text and Language

FRLANT

Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Griechische christliche Schriftsteller J. Hastings (ed.), A Dictionary of the Bible Hibbert Journal Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Harper's New Testament Commentaries Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Harvard Theological Review Harvard Theological Studies Interpreter's Bible Irish Biblical Studies International Critical Commentary Israel Exploration Journal JahrbuchfurAntike und Christentum Jerusalem Bible Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Ecclesiastical History Journal of Jewish Studies Jewish Quarterly Review Journal of Religion Journal of Religious History Journal of Roman Studies Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of Theological Studies Kerygma und Dogma Loeb Classical Library Liddell-Scott-Jones, Greek-English Lexicon Lutheran Theological Journal Moffatt New Testament Commentary New American Standard Bible New Century Bible New English Bible Neotestamentica Nag Hammadi Studies New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Version Novum Testamentum Novum Testamentum, Supplements La nouvelle revue theologique New Testament Studies Oxford Classical Dictionary

GCS HDB HibJ HNT HNTC HTKNT HTR HTS IB IBS ICC IEJ JAC JB JBL JEH JJS JQR JR JRH JRS JSJ JSNT JSS JTS KD LCL LS J LThJ MNTC NASB NCB NEB Neot NHS NICNT NIV NovT NovTSup NRT NTS O CD

Abbreviations

PEA PEQ PG PL RB RE REJ RivB RSR RSV RV SBLDS SBLSP SC SJ SJT SNTSMS SPB STD J Str-B TBl TDNT TEV THKNT TLZ TRu TS TSAJ TU TWNT TynBul TZ UBSGNT VC VT VTSup WBC WUNT ZNW ZPE

11

Proceedings of the British Academy Palestine Exploration Quarterly J. Migne (ed.), Patrologia graeca J. Migne (ed.), Patrologia latina Revue biblique Realencyklopddie fur protestantiche Theologie und Kirche Revue des etudes juives Rivista biblica Recherches de science religieuse Revised Standard Version Revised Version SBL Dissertation Series SBL Seminar Papers Sources chretiennes Studiajudaica Scottish Journal of Theology Society of New Testament Studies Monograph Series Studia postbiblica Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah [H. Strack and] P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch Theologische Blatter G. Kittel and G. Friedrich (eds.), Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Today's English Version Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament Theologische Literaturzeitung Theologische Rundschau Theological Studies Texte und Studien zum antiken Judentum Texte und Untersuchungen G. Kittel and G. Friedrich (eds.), Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament Tyndale Bulletin Theologische Zeitschrift United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament Vigiliae christianae Vetus Testamentum Vetus Testamentum, Supplements Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift fur Papyrologie und Epigraphile

This page intentionally left blank

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS J. Eugene Botha, UNISA, Pretoria, South Africa tF.F. Bruce Randall Buth, Summer Institute of Linguistics, Sudan Howard Eshbaugh, Hillcrest United Presbyterian Church, Burgettstown, Pennsylvania Thomas C. Geer, Jr, Abilene Christian University, Abilene, Texas Kenneth Grayston, University of Bristol, England tA.T. Hanson tColin Hemer Stephen A. Kaufman, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio Stan Larson, University of Birmingham, England Dennis R. Lindsay, Springdale College, Selly Oak Colleges, Birmingham, England R. Sheldon Mackenzie, Queen's College, Memorial University, St John's, Newfoundland, Canada David S. New, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Carroll D. Osburn, Abilene Christian University, Abilene, Texas David Parker, University of Birmingham, England Stanley E. Porter, Roehampton Institute London, England Dave Steenberg, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Pieter W. van der Horst, Utrecht University, The Netherlands A. J.M. Wedderburn, University of Munich, Germany Max Wilcox, Macquarie University, New South Wales, Australia R.McL. Wilson, University of St Andrews, Scotland

This page intentionally left blank

TEXT

This page intentionally left blank

JSNT 44 (1991), pp. 39-55

THE SEARCH FOR THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF ACTS— THE INTERNATIONAL PROJECT ON THE TEXT OF ACTS Carroll D. Osburn

The observation of Klijn1 in the Schubert Festschrift over two decades ago that 'there has never been so little agreement about the nature of the original text [of Acts] as at the moment' remains an accurate assessment even today. However, for several years various New Testament textual scholars have been involved in an ambitious project to provide a more extensive Greek apparatus for studies in the text of Acts. Originating with the extensive collations of manuscripts of Acts by Thomas C. Geer, Jr, as part of his work on the citations of Acts in Epiphanius of Salamis2 and the so-called 'Western' cursives in Acts,3 the project was expanded by Carroll D. Osburn into the Greek lectionaries, ancient versions and patristic citations. Formalized into The International Project on the Text of Acts, the project was announced at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in 1985 and subsequently at the Conference on the Textual Criticism of the Greek New Testament at Queen's College, Birmingham, England, in 1987. Centered at Abilene Christian University with a generous endowment, the project is under the direction of Osburn and Geer. The extensive critical apparatus emerging from the collations of numerous scholars is to be published with a view toward the eventual publication of a major critical edition of Acts. 1. A.F.J. Klijn, 'In Search of the Original Text of Acts', in Studies in LukeActs: Essays Presented in Honor of Paul Schubert (ed. L.E. Keck and J.L. Martyn; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966), p. 108. 2. The Text of Acts in Epiphanius of Salamis' (unpublished MA thesis, Harding Graduate School of Religion, 1980). 3. The Investigation of a Select Group of So-Called Western Cursives in Acts' (unpublished PhD dissertation, Boston University, 1985).

18

New Testament Text and Language 1. The Legacy of Text-Critical Work in Acts

To speak of legacy with regard to textual studies in Acts is to acknowledge an immense amount of labor on the part of a veritable host of textual critics whose efforts evoke sincere appreciation.4 For various reasons, however, these extensive labors have failed to yield a uniform conclusion with regard to the text of Acts. The legacy is manifold, but it is useful to mention certain components here. a. The Apparatus Criticus of Acts The classic expression of textual data in Tischendorf s eighth edition of 1872,5 although a magnificent contribution to textual studies in Acts, evidenced imperfections and limitations which led to the call for a 'new Tischendorf which the voluminous effort of von Soden6 failed to supply. Neither the International Greek New Testament Project, now continu ing on into the Fourth Gospel,7 nor the Institut fur neutestamentliche Textforschung at Miinster8 had Acts on the immediate agenda when the Acts Project was being formed. Current hand-editions of the Greek New Testament9 do contain selected references to readings in important 4. Unfortunately, the history of text-critical studies in Acts was omitted in the useful work of W. Gasque, A History of the Criticism of the Acts of the Apostles (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2nd edn, 1989). 5. C. Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum Graece, II (Leipzig: Giesecke & Devrient, 1872). 6. H. von Soden, Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments in ihrer altesten erreichbaren Textgestalt (2 vols.; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2nd edn, 1911, 1913). 7. D. Parker, 'The International Greek New Testament Project: The Gospel of John', NTS 36 (1990), pp. 157-60. 8. Conversation with Barbara Aland in Miinster on 23 October 1986. See K. Aland, 'Novi Testamenti Graeci editio maior critica', NTS 16 (1970), pp. 163-77. K. Aland has now published Text und Textwert der griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments. I. Die katholischen Briefe (Arbeiten zur neutestamentliche Textforschung, 9-11; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1987), and Romans-2 Corinthians is in press. 9. K. Aland, M. Black, C. Martini, B. Metzger and A. Wikgren (eds.), The Greek New Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 3rd edn, 1983); K. and B. Aland (eds.), Novum Testamentum Graece (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, 26th edn, 1979); as well as A. Merk, Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 9th edn, 1964), and J.M. Bover, Novi Testamenti: Biblia Graeca et Latina (Madrid: Graficas Condor, 5th edn, 1958).

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

19

manuscripts discovered since Tischendorf, but these are too sporadic and will not suffice for critical work. Current research in Acts, then, must rely upon textual apparatuses that are quite limited and not altogether trustworthy. b. The Textual History of Acts The textual history of Acts is not at all certain. From at least the time of Bengel in 1725, efforts to classify New Testament manuscripts into groups eventually achieved classical formulation in the work of Westcott and Hort.10 Basically, three types of text emerged, one best represented by the fourth-century uncials Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (N), another by Codex Bezae (D), and a third by the mass of Byzantine cursives. The types of text in B and D differ so markedly that Blass11 was able to propose that these reflect two editions of Acts, both attributable to Luke. While Blass's theory of two Lukan editions of Acts did not become widely accepted,12 the significant differences between these two types of text led Ropes13 to opt for the B type of text as the original form of Acts, and A.C. Clark,14 on the other hand, to argue vigorously for the text of D as more nearly the original. These alternatives have remained the principal options in text-critical work on Acts until the present. 1. The Egyptian text. It cannot be said that the text found in B has achieved adequate description. Kenneth Clark15 observed that most twentieth-century scholarship has viewed B as the product of a fourthcentury revision. However, the discovery of $p75 (which does not contain the text of Acts) required a drastic revision of that understanding for 10. B.F. Westcott and FJ.A. Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek (Cambridge: Macmillan, 1881,1882). 11. F. Blass, Acta Apostolorum sive Lucae ad Theophilum liber alter (Leipzig: Teubner, 1896). 12. But see now E. Delebecque, 'Les deux prologues des Actes des Apotres', RevThom 80 (1980), pp. 628-34, and 'Les deux versions du voyage de saint Paul de Corinthe a Troas (Ac 20, 3-6)', Bib 64 (1983), pp. 556-64. 13. J.H. Ropes, The Beginnings of Christianity. III. The Text of Acts (ed. F. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake; London: Macmillan, 1926). 14. A.C. Clark, The Acts of the Apostles (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933). 15. K. Clark, The Effect of Recent Textual Criticism upon New Testament Studies', in The Background of the New Testament and its Eschatology (ed. W.D. Davies and D. Daube; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1956), p. 37.

20

New Testament Text and Language

the portion of text for which it is extant, pushing the date of the B text back from c. 350 CE to 200 CE, but failing to answer the question of whether the B text was the result of a late second-century revision or not. Fee16 has argued strongly that there was no such revision. Nevertheless, as Talbert17 has observed, 4$p75 has had the effect of making the B text's reign supreme in the UBS and 26th Nestle edition'. Haenchen,18 reflective of much current opinion, is so bold as to say that $p75 'is— although it permits only indirect conclusions about the texts of Acts— more important than Pap. 74, which itself contains a text of Acts'. It must be remembered, however, that this view, although widely held, goes well beyond the textual evidence for Acts. 2. The 'Western' text. Ropes was certain that a Western text once existed, but was never quite able to give an adequate explanation of its origin. Subsequent scholarship was not certain whether the 'Western' text was actually a text-type or merely a collection of readings. Whether it reflects a recension was unclear.19 No manuscript was found which exhibited a purely 'Western' text. The so-called 'Western' cursives have been found to be Byzantine, in fact, with only some 'Western' readings.20 Nevertheless, Boismard21 has attempted recently to demonstrate the Western text in Acts, although with dubious results.22 The failure of scholars to agree upon the precise contours of the 'Western' text of Acts led to the search for a leading tendency which 16. G. Fee, '?p75, ^66, and Origen: The Myth of Early Textual Recension in Alexandria', in New Dimensions in New Testament Studies (ed. R. Longenecker and M. Tenney; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), pp. 31-44. 17. C. Talbert, 'Luke-Acts', in The New Testament and its Modern Interpreters (ed. E. Epp and G. MacRae; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989), p. 300. 18. E. Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles (trans. B. Noble and G. Shinn, with H. Anderson; rev. R.McL. Wilson; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971), p. 59. 19. T. Petersen ('An Early Coptic Manuscript of Acts: An Unrevised Version of the Ancient So-Called Western Text', CBQ 26 [1964], pp. 225-41) was unable to withstand the rigorous analysis of E. Haenchen and P. Weigandt, 'The Original Text of Acts?', NTS 14 (1968), pp. 469-81. 20. Geer, 'Investigation of a Select Group of So-Called Western Cursives'. 21. M.-E. Boismard and A. Lamouille,Le texte occidentale des Actes des Apotres: Reconstruction et rehabilitation (Paris: Editions recherche sur les civilisations, 1984). 22. T.C. Geer (The Presence and Significance of Lucanisms in the "Western" Text of Acts', JSNT 39 [1990], pp. 59-76) has observed several problems with the approach of Boismard and Lamouille.

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

21

might demonstrate that these readings originated in one basic viewpoint. Beginning with the works of Menoud23 and Williams,24 anti-Jewish remarks were isolated, an area of research continued by Epp,25 Thiele,26 Wilcox,27 and Hanson,28 among others. The results of these studies, however, failed to fix a particular time or place of origination of the 'Western' text in Acts. Now Barrett29 has even questioned to what extent one can speak of theological tendency in the 'Western' text of Acts, a matter of no small importance given the growing number of studies attempting to isolate yet other 'tendencies',30 several with highly questionable results.31 In this connection, it may be mentioned that the

23. P.H. Menoud, The Western Text and the Theology of Acts', Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas Bulletin 2 (1951), pp. 19-32. 24. C.S.C. Williams, Alterations to the Text of the Synoptic Gospels and Acts (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1951). 25. E.J. Epp, The "Ignorance Motif in Acts and Anti-Judaic Tendencies in Codex Bezae', HTR 55 (1962), pp. 51-62, and The Theological Tendency of Codex Cantabrigiensis in Acts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966). 26. W. Thiele, 'Ausgewahlte Beispiele zur Charakterisierung des "westlichen" Textes der Apostelgeschichte', 2AW56 (1965), pp. 51-63. 27. M. Wilcox, The Semitisms of Acts (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965). 28. R.P.C. Hanson, The Provenance of the Interpolator in the "Western" Text of Acts and of Acts Itself', NTS 12 (1966), pp. 211-30. 29. C.K. Barrett, 'Is There a Theological Tendency in Codex Bezae?', in Text and Interpretation: Studies in the New Testament Presented to Matthew Black (ed. E. Best and R.McL. Wilson; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), pp. 15-27. 30. See, among others, M. Black, The Holy Spirit in the Western Text of Acts', in New Testament Textual Criticism: Essays in Honour of Bruce M. Metzger (ed. G. Fee and E. Epp; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 159-70; E.J. Epp, The Ascension in the Textual Tradition of Luke-Acts', in New Testament Textual Criticism, pp. 131-45; and C. Martini, 'La tradition textuelle des Actes des Apotres', in Les Actes des Apotres (BETL, 48; Gembloux: Duculot, 1979), pp. 21-35. 31. See, for instance, B. Witherington, The Anti-Feminist Tendencies of the "Western" Text in Acts', JBL 103 (1984), pp. 82-84; R. Pervo, 'Social and Religious Aspects of the "Western" Text', in The Living Text, Essays in Honor of Ernest W. Saunders (ed. D. Groh and R. Jewett; New York: University Press of America, 1985), pp. 229-41; J.P. Schaelling, The Western Text of the Book of Acts: A Mirror of Doctrinal Struggles in the Early Christian Church', in Apocryphal Writings and the Latter-Day Saints (ed. C.W. Griggs; Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1986), pp. 155-72; and M.C. Parsons, 'A Christological Tendency in 91, which contains 2.30-37 and 2.46-3.2. 34. See C.C. Tarelli, The Chester Beatty Papyrus and the Caesarean Text', JTS 40 (1939), pp. 46-55. 35. R.V.G. Tasker, The Nature of the Text of the Chester-Beatty Papyrus in Acts', JTS 38 (1937), pp. 383-94, esp. 393-94. 36. S. New, The New Chester Beatty Papyrus', JBL 51 (1932), p. 73. 37. Haenchen, Acts of the Apostles, p. 50 n. 2. 38. K. Lake, J. de Zwaan and M.S. Enslin, 'Codex 1739', in Six Collations of

New Testament Manuscripts (Harvard Theological Studies, 17; Cambridge MA-

Harvard University Press, 1932), pp. 144-45.

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

23

with little doubt the text of Romans in 1739 is that which Origen used, while the text of the other epistles is based on an ancient copy which the compiler of the archetypal text, who seems to have had an intelligent and accurate interest in textual questions, identified as agreeing with the text used by Origen in his commentaries.39

However, they are quick to caution that 'It is natural to presume that the same may be true of Acts, but here the evidence fails. The scribe of the archetype tells us nothing.' There is, however, no solid evidence for a 'Caesarean' text of Acts. It is possible that a closer investigation of the citations of Acts in Origen and Eusebius might clarify the situation regarding a possible 'Caesarean' text of Acts. In view of the paucity of solid evidence currently available, it seems best to follow the observation of Sanders40 that little can be assumed regarding a possible 'Caesarean' text of Acts. Rather than solving the problem of the pre-fourth-century text of Acts, the papyri seem to have clouded the arena of those working with the rather rigid model of the history of textual transmission inherited from Hort.41 Aland,42 for instance, has rightly questioned the advisability of trying to press these early papyri into ill-fitting molds from a later period. The term 'mixed' to describe the text of these papyri is

39. E. von der Goltz's comparison ('Eine textkritische Arbeit des zehnten bezw. sechsten Jahrhunderts, herausgegeben nach einem Kodex des Athosklosters Lawra', in Texte und Untersuchungen [Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1899], p. 17) of 1739 with only selected items in Tischendorf s apparatus is found by T.C. Geer ('Codex 1739 in Acts and its Relationship to Manuscripts 945 and 1891', Bib 69 [1988], pp. 2746), based upon an examination of more than 2400 (!) instances of variation in Acts, to be Egyptian in character with only nine 'Western' readings*. 40. H.A. Sanders, The Egyptian Text of the Four Gospels and Acts', HTR 26 (1933), p. 94. 41. See now E.J. Epp, The Significance of the Papyri for Determining the Nature of the New Testament Text in the Second Century: A Dynamic View of Textual Transmission', in Gospel Traditions in the Second Century: Origins, Recensions, Text, and Transmission (ed. W.L. Petersen; Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1989), pp. 71-103, and The New Testament Papyrus Manuscripts in Historical Perspective', in To Touch the Text: Biblical and Related Studies in Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer (ed. M.P. Horgan and P.P. Kobelski; New York: Crossroad, 1989), pp. 261-88. 42. K. Aland, The Significance of the Papyri for Progress in New Testament Research', in The Bible in Modern Scholarship (ed. J.P. Hyatt; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966), p. 336.

24

New Testament Text and Language

inadequate text-critical terminology reflecting a lack of clarity in the discipline regarding the early history of textual transmission. 4. The Byzantine text. In addition to the traditional Egyptian/'Western' alternatives, yet another response to the breakdown of the Hortian theory of textual transmission has been the resurgence of the textus receptus. Although most of the literature spawned by this thrust has been pseudo-scholarly and should not be taken seriously, the works of Pickering43 and Sturz44 have begun to attract a small following and the Majority Text exists now in a second edition.45 This emphasis upon the Byzantine manuscripts emerges largely because of the fact that, following Hort's dismal assessment, the Byzantine tradition has been disdained in critical scholarship without having received careful delineation. Although the current resurgence of interest in the textus receptus appears to be a mere reversion to the earlier days of Dean Burgon, it too must be taken quite seriously as part of the legacy in textual studies in Acts, demonstrating the necessity of giving adequate attention to the neglected Byzantine tradition. 5. Ancient versions. Although our understanding of the origin of the Old Latin versions is defective, it seems clear that it was not a single effort, but multifarious. Metzger46 notes that 'the textual affinities of the Old Latin versions are unmistakably with the Western type of text', yet there exists no adequate critical edition of the Old Latin and important Vulgate manuscripts of Acts. Kerschensteiner47 concluded that Aphraates, Ephraem and the author 43. W.N. Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1977), reviewed scathingly by G.D. Fee, 'Modern Textual Criticism and the Revival of the Textus Receptus', JETS 21 (1978), pp. 19-33, and 4 A Critique of W.N. Pickering's The Identity of the New Testament Text\ WTJ 41 (1979), pp. 397423. 44. H.A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type and New Testament Textual Criticism (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1984). Note critical reviews by G.D. Fee, JETS 28 (1985), pp. 239-42, and J.K. Elliott, NovT2* (1986), pp. 282-84. 45. Z.C. Hodges and A. Farstad, The Greek New Testament according to the Majority Text (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2nd edn, 1985). See the cautious reviews of M. Silva, Wry (1983), pp. 184-88, and G.D. Kilpatrick, NovT(l9M), pp. 85-86. 46. B.M. Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), p. 325. 47. J. Kerschensteiner, 'Beobachtungen zum altsyrischen Actatext', Bib 44

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

25

of Liber Graduum used essentially the same 'Old Syriac' text of Acts. Hatch48 observed that the text of Acts in the Peshitta 'contains many "Western" readings, but its text is mainly that of the Old Uncial family'. Regarding the relationship of the Peshitta to the later manuscript tradition, Ropes49 asserted that the readings which depart from the Old Uncial text and follow the Antiochian are usually found in 'Western' witnesses, and there seems no trace of the peculiar and distinctive selection of readings which is the chief recognizable characteristic of the Antiochian text.

With regard to the Harclean version, Metzger50 notes that the apparatus which Thomas attached to the version has made it, at least for the book of Acts, one of the most important witnesses to the Western text that have come down to us, surpassed in this respect only by codex Bezae.

Yet no critical edition exists of the Syriac Acts. Concerning the Coptic versions of Acts,51 Hatch noted that the Sahidic combines elements from the Egyptian and 'Western' texts.52 Ropes 53 observed that since the Sahidic lacks most of the major 'Western' readings, yet reads many of the minor 'Western' readings, it probably was based upon a Greek text, 'Western' in character, but corrected according to an Alexandrian type of text. Adams54 concludes that 'the Bohairic is very close to the N B text, containing far fewer readings

(1964), pp. 63-74. See also A. Voobus, 'Die Entdeckung von Uberresten der altsyrischen Apostelgeschichte', OrChr 64 (1980), pp. 32-35. 48. W.H.P. Hatch, The Vulgate, Peshitto, Sahidic, and Bohairic Versions of Acts and the Greek Manuscripts', HTR 21 (1928), p. 81. 49. Ropes, Text of Acts, p. cxlix. 50. Metzger, Early Versions, p. 73. See A.V. Valentine-Richards, The Text of Acts in Codex 614 (Tisch, 137) and its Allies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1934), pp. xvi-xix, as well as the review by F.C. Burkitt, JTS 36 (1935), pp. 191-94, for discussion of the relation of the marginal readings in the Harclean Acts to a group of Greek cursives. 51. See A. Joussen, Die koptischen Versionen der Apostelgeschichte (Bonn: Peter Hanstein, 1969). 52. Hatch, 'The Vulgate', pp. 86-88. 53. Ropes, Text of Acts, p. cxliii. 54. See A.W. Adams' revision of F.G. Kenyon, The Text of the Greek Bible (London: Duckworth, 3rd edn, 1975), p. 142.

26

New Testament Text and Language

of the D type than the Sahidic'. Koole55 notes further that in Acts, the Bohairic never agrees with B when it disagrees with the other Alexandrian witnesses. The text of the Glazier codex of Acts in the Middle Egyptian dialect is described by Metzger56 as a 'notable representative of the so-called Western type of text'. Kahle57 found the Fayyumic text to agree essentially with the Bohairic. Yet there exists no adequate critical edition of Acts in Coptic. It remains unclear whether the Armenian text of Acts58 was made from the Greek or the Syriac, but a preliminary analysis by Lyonnet59 discloses readings of the Egyptian and 'Western' texts. Similarly, there is no consensus on whether the Old Georgian text of Acts was based upon the Greek or Syriac, or to what extent the Armenian text was involved. The abundance of early 'Western' readings in the Old Georgian text of Acts60 led Conybeare61 to detect a resemblance with the bilinguals D and E. More recently, however, Birdsall62 has observed this oft-repeated assessment of Conybeare to have been 'far wide of the mark and... gravely misleading', as the Old Georgian text actually has a high number of readings of the Egyptian and 'Western' types of text. While the origin of the Ethiopic text of Acts63 lacks definition, Montgomery64 found an 55. J.L. Koole, 'Die koptische Ubersetzung der Apostelgeschichte', Bulletin of the Bezan Club 12 (1937), pp. 69-70. 56. Metzger,. Early Versions, p. 119. See also E.J. Epp, 'Coptic Manuscript G67 and the Role of Codex Bezae as a Western Witness in Acts', JBL 85 (1966), pp. 197-212. 57. P. Kahle, Bala'izah: Coptic Texts from Deir el-Bala'izah in Upper Egypt (London: Oxford University Press, 1954), pp. 286-90. 58. J. Zohrab, AstowacaSown? Matean Hin ew Nor Katakaranc (Venice, 1805), based upon MS 1508 in the Mechitarist monastery at Venice, with scattered references to variant readings in other manuscripts, none of which are identified. 59. R.P. Lyonnet in M.-J. Lagrange, Critique textuelle. II. La critique rationelle (Paris: Gabalda, 1935), pp. 459, 527-28. 60. See now G. Garitte, L'ancienne version georgienne des Actes des Apotres (Louvain: Publications Universitaires, 1955), based upon two MSS; I. Abuladze, Sakme mockikult'a dzveli xelnacerebis mixedvit' (Monuments of the Old Georgian Language, 7; Tbilisi: Georgian Academy of Sciences, 1949), based upon four MSS. 61. F.C. Conybeare, The Old Georgian Version of Acts', ZNW 12 (1911), pp. 131-40, is based upon an analysis of only four chapters in one manuscript. 62. N. Birdsall, 'The Georgian Versions of the Acts of the Apostles', in Text and Testimony: Essays on New Testament and Apocryphal Literature in Honour of A.F.J. Klijn (ed. T. Baarda et al.\ Kampen: Kok, 1988), pp. 39-45. 63. T.P. Platt, The Ethiopic New Testament (rev. F. Praetorius; Leipzig, 1899),

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

27

uncommon tendency in the manuscript he analyzed to abbreviate, yet with significant alignment with the Antiochian textual tradition and evidencing some coincidences with an Egyptian form of text. No critical editions exist of Acts in Armenian, Georgian, or Ethiopic. 6. Patristic citations. Several studies are extant of the text of Acts in the church fathers, most rather brief. Illustrative are those of Cerfaux,65 Birdsall66 on Photius, Barnard67 on Clement of Alexandria, von Soden68 on Cyprian, and Burkitt69 on Augustine. Few intensive studies exist, such as Conybeare70 on Ephraem. Critical studies of the text of Acts in the Greek fathers is an urgent desideratum. 1. Manuscript groupings. Further complicating matters are the groupings of manuscripts left as a legacy by earlier scholarship, principally those of von Soden, whose sampling methods and accuracy have been severely criticized. Inherited from earlier generations was a method of grouping manuscripts based upon their agreement against the textus receptus. Rarely was a comparison of total agreement and disagreement taken into account, with the result that a number of witnesses were inexactly or inconclusively assigned to a grouping of manuscripts. Improving upon based upon one manuscript. See O. Lofgren, 'The Necessity of a Critical Edition of the Ethiopian Bible', in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Ethiopian Studies (Addis Ababa, 1970), pp. 167ff. 64. J.A. Montgomery, The Ethiopic Text of Acts of the Apostles', HTR 27 (1934), pp. 169-205. 65. L. Cerfaux, 'Citations scriptuairis et tradition textuelle dans le livre des Actes', in Aux sources de la tradition chretienne: Melanges offert a M. Maurice Goguel (Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestle, 1950), pp. 43-51. 66. N. Birdsall, 'The Text of the Acts and the Epistles in Photius', JTS 9 (1958), pp. 278-91. 67. P.M. Barnard, The Biblical Text of Clement of Alexandria in the Four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles (Texts and Studies; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899), V, pp. 62-64, with comment on Acts in the 'Introduction' by F.C. Burkitt (p. xvii). 68. H. von Soden, Das lateinische Neue Testament in Afrika zur Zeit Cyprians (Texte und Untersuchungen, 33; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1909), pp. 221-42, 32363, 550-67. 69. F.C. Burkitt, 'Saint Augustine's Bible and the Itala', JTS 11 (1910), pp. 25868,447-58. 70. F.C. Conybeare, The Commentary of Ephraem on Acts', in Ropes, Text of Acts, pp. 373-453.

28

New Testament Text and Language

this method, Colwell and Tune71 developed a quantitative method for comparing New Testament manuscripts which, rather than comparison with some external norm, involved measuring each manuscript against all the others in the study. It was essentially a sampling method, however, and thus showed certain inadequacies.72 Alternatively, Geer's dissertation on the so-called 'Western' cursives in Acts involved full collations of all manuscripts analyzed and found, for instance, that 383 (often thought to be 'Western') is actually a Byzantine manuscript with certain readings characteristic of the 'Western' tradition in chs. 12-23. Similarly, Geer found that 614, commonly accepted as a 'Western' witness, is actually Byzantine with some 'Western' readings in chs. 1227. Also, MS 33, often classified as Egyptian, is actually Byzantine from 1.1-11.25, and Egyptian thereafter. Consequently, those textual groupings which have been left to us by our predecessors are suspect,73 necessitating a complete reconsideration of groupings based upon full textual data. 8. Eclecticism. Others74 have responded to the breakdown in the traditional theory of the early history of the text by pursuing the eclectic

71. E.G. Colwell and E.W. Tune, The Quantitative Relationships between MS Text-Types', in Biblical and Patristic Studies in Memory of Robert Pierce Casey (ed. J.N. Birdsall and R.W. Thompson; Freiburg: Herder, 1963), pp. 25-33. 72. As do the sampling works of P. McReynolds, 'The Claremont Profile Method and the Grouping of Byzantine Manuscripts' (unpublished PhD dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1968), and F. Wisse, The Claremont Profile Method for the Classification of Byzantine New Testament Manuscripts: A Study in Method' (unpublished PhD dissertation, Claremont Graduate School, 1968). See now Wisse, The Profile Method for Classifying and Evaluating Manuscript Evidence (Studies and Documents, 44; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982). 73. See such lists in B. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2nd edn, 1968), pp. 213-16, and J.H. Greenlee, New Testament Textual Criticism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), p. 117. The list in K. Aland and B. Aland, The Text of the New Testament (trans. E. Rhodes; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2nd edn, 1989), pp. 159-62, 317-37, reflects an effort to reclassify manuscripts based upon a series of test passages. 74. See G.D. Kilpatrick, 'An Eclectic Study of the Text of Acts', in Birdsall and Thompson (eds.), Biblical and Patristic Studies, pp. 64-77, and 'Western Text and Original Text in the Gospels and Acts', JTS 44 (1943), pp. 24-36.

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

29

method 'rigorously' with results quite different. Epp75 and Fee76 have responded to what they perceive as an uncontrolled employment of the eclectic method, arguing that displacement of external evidence by internal considerations is unwise. Some, however, continue to advocate the necessity of a rather rigorous eclectic approach.77 Aland78 suggests now that the quest to attempt a reconstruction of the early history of the text of the New Testament is improper and perhaps even naive, preferring to have instances of variation assessed one-by-one to determine which readings are original and which are derivative. In this vein, a process commonly termed 'reasoned' eclecticism was followed by the editorial committee that produced the UBSGNT, and the NestleAland 26th edition. Reviewers have been keen to point out that underlying this approach is a decided preference for the tf B text and that the committee has been greatly influenced by the 'dead hand of Hort'.79 As far back as 1956, however, Kenneth Clark80 observed correctly concerning the eclectic approach to New Testament textual criticism that It is the only procedure available to us at this stage, but it is very important to recognize that it is a secondary and tentative method. It is not a new method nor a permanent one. The eclectic method cannot by itself create a text to displace Westcott-Hort and its offspring. It is suitable only for exploration and experimentation... The eclectic method, by its very nature, belongs to a day like ours in which we know only that the traditional theory of the text is faulty, but cannot yet see clearly to correct the fault.

75. E.J. Epp, 'The Eclectic Method in New Testament Textual Criticism: Solution or Symptom?', HTR 69 (1976), pp. 211-57. 76. G.D. Fee, 'Rigorous or Reasoned Eclecticism—Which?', in Studies in New Testament Language and Text: Essays in Honour of George D. Kilpatrick (ed. J.K. Elliott; Leiden: Brill, 1976), pp. 174-97. 77. See, among others, J.K. Elliott, 'Keeping up with Recent Studies: XV. New Testament Textual Criticism', ExpTim 99 (1987), p. 44. 78. K. Aland, 'The Twentieth Century Interlude in New Testament Textual Criticism', in Text and Interpretation: Studies in the New Testament Presented to Matthew Black (ed. E. Best and R.McL. Wilson; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), p. 11. 79. See, among others, J.K. Elliott, 'An Examination of the Twenty-Sixth Edition of Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece\ JTS 32 (1981), pp. 19-49, and 'A Second Look at the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament', BT26 (1975), pp. 325-32. 80. Clark, 'Recent Textual Criticism', pp. 37-38.

30

New Testament Text and Language

And in this vein, Klijn81 summarized in 1969, it appears that textual criticism is in a favorable position to deal with the text of Acts. Yet those who by the way of the eclectic method, try to restore the original text have reached markedly different results. The eclectic method.. .appears to lead us into complete chaos.

Klijn then concludes his essay on the current status of the text of Acts (p. 108) by observing that 'with the acceptance of the eclectic method, there has never been so little agreement about the nature of the original text as at the moment'. Alternatively, Epp82 has advocated that the search for the original text cannot be conducted apart from an adequate understanding of the history of the transmission of the text. Indeed, an adequate textual history would render the historical-documentary method the principal procedure.83 It seems clear, however, that until the early history of the text has received careful delineation, the eclectic method will continue as the principal procedure in text-critical analysis.84 If, ultimately, it proves impossible to reconstruct the early history of the text of Acts, the eclectic method will, of necessity, become the standard procedure. The legacy in textual studies in Acts, then, is that we no longer have a clear understanding of the history of the transmission of the text, either in its earlier or in its later forms, and this has thrown textual decisionmaking into a rather chaotic situation. Not long ago, Klijn could observe that most decisions tended in favor of B. However, presently more and more scholars are opting for the D type of reading as original, and the textus receptus claimants are not silent. Eclecticism has created considerable confusion. It is, therefore, not unfair to surmise that the situation today regarding the text of Acts is even somewhat worse than Klijn had observed in 1969.

81. Klijn, Studies in Luke-Acts, p. 104. 82. E.J. Epp, 'A Continuing Interlude in New Testament Textual Criticism', HTR 73 (1980), pp. 131-51. 83. B.C. Colwell, 'External Evidence and New Testament Criticism', in Studies in the History and Text of the New Testament in Honor of Kenneth Willis Clark (Studies and Documents, 29; ed. B. Daniels and J. Suggs; Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1967), p. 5. 84. E.J. Epp, 'Textual Criticism', in The New Testament and its Modern Interpreters, p. 96.

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

31

2. The Text-Critical Task The impact of the uncertainty regarding the text of Acts is keenly felt in the exegetical arena. There does not exist a text of Acts which is critically edited upon the basis of all available textual information and scholars have no alternative but to begin their textual studies with the limited and less-than-trustworthy apparatus of Tischendorf, supplementing it with whatever other sources can be located. Not only are the majority of Greek manuscripts of Acts uncollated and uninvestigated, but the versional evidence in the printed editions of Acts is seriously in need of reinvestigation. Further, the patristic evidence in the printed editions is scanty, often based upon printed editions of the fathers which have not themselves been critically edited, and lacking information to assess whether the reference is a genuine citation, adaptation, or mere allusion.85 The Greek lectionaries of Acts remain uninvestigated.86 Clearly, the task for New Testament textual criticism is the production of a critical edition of the text of Acts, based upon a complete apparatus and an adequate understanding of the history of the transmission of the text. Full collations of all available manuscripts and groupings of manuscripts based upon an evaluation of the total evidence are required. New Testament textual criticism has been plagued for too long by short-cuts. At some point, textual critics must engage the total evidence and give an adequate account of what is there.87 It does not behoove those of us engaged in rigorous and exacting scholarship to say that there is nothing of consequence in texts that have not been closely examined and analyzed. With Acts, there is no reason to preclude the accumulation and examination of total Greek information. Full collations of approximately one third of the Greek manuscripts of Acts are already in hand, along 85. See G. Fee, The Text of John in Origen and Cyril of Alexandria: A Contribution to Methodology in the Recovery and Analysis of Patristic Citations', Bib 52 (1971), pp. 357-95, and B. Metzger, 'Patristic Evidence and the Textual Criticism of the New Testament', NTS 18 (1972), pp. 379-400. 86. The study of D.E. Ericsson, The Book of Acts in the Greek New Testament' (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Chicago, 1961), employed the multiplereadings method to analyze variants from the textus receptus in only four lections in twenty-four lectionaries of Acts. 87. See W.J. Elliott, The Need for an Accurate and Comprehensive Collation of All Known Greek NT Manuscripts with their Individual Variants Noted inpleno\ in J.K. Elliott (ed.), Studies in New Testament Language and Text, pp. 136-43.

32

New Testament Text and Language

with numerous Greek lectionaries, and various scholars are continuing the collation process. In co-operation with the Vetus Latina Institut at Beuron, Jakobus Petzer is heading the investigation of all Latin manuscripts prior to the ninth century and later manuscripts with especially interesting texts, as well as the Latin fathers. Joseph Alexanian,88 in co-operation with the International Association of Armenian Studies, leads the Armenian investigation. This project has entered the Armenian text of Acts on the database at the University of Leiden, initiated revision of the list of Armenian manuscripts of Acts, and begun the collation of Armenian texts. Eight Old Georgian manuscripts of Acts from Sinai, Jerusalem and Athos have been collated by Jeffrey Childers, with seven others to be collated in Tbilisi in association with the Institute of Manuscripts.89 The analysis of the Old Georgian version is under the oversight of Neville Birdsall. Formalization of the Coptic and Syriac projects on Acts is nearing announcement stage. The project on Acts in Ethiopic manuscripts is underway with Curt Niccum's dissertation at Notre Dame. Patristic citations are being accessed through Augustine. In addition to Osburn's work on Methodius of Olympus and Geer's earlier thesis on the text of Acts in Epiphanius of Salamis, theses are in process at Abilene Christian University on the text of the New Testament in Hippolytus of Rome (Curt Niccum), as well as the text of Acts in Origen and Eusebius (Stanley Helton).90 With discipline in collations, careful isolation of variation units, and computer assistance in retrieval of pertinent data in manageable form, the publication of the apparatus is within grasp, beginning this year with a preliminary presentation and analysis of all uncial data. When complete 88. See J.M. Alexanian, 'Remarks on the Armenian Text of the Acts of the Apostles', in S. Ajamian and M.E. Stone (eds.), Text and Context: Studies in the Armenian New Testament (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994), pp. 15-22. 89. See J.W. Childers, 'The Old Georgian Acts of the Apostles: A Progress Report', NTS 42 (1996), pp. 55-74. 90. K. Aland and B. Aland (The Text of the New Testament, p. 172) state that 'If the question of the existence of a "Caesarean text" and its character is to be answered fully and finally, this must be done from Origen's quotations. But it still remains unexplained why most of the known alternative readings are also usually found attested in Origen's writings. Nor has anyone yet been able to trace the "Caesarean text" in Eusebius of Caesarea, although Eusebius is the most likely creator and promoter of this text type in view of his scriptorium and the influence enjoyed in official places.'

OSBURN The Search for the Original Text of Acts

33

data are available, a more accurate grouping of all manuscripts will be possible and a better understanding of the history of the transmission of the text should emerge. Work along these lines is certainly prerequisite to a critical edition of Acts which, it is hoped, can reverse the negative assessment of Klijn about there never being 'so little agreement about the nature of the original text [of Acts] as at the moment'. As of 1996, the publication of a critical text of Acts in Greek will be a joint collaborative effort of the International Project on the Text of Acts and the Institut fur neutestamentliche Textforschung in Miinster.

JSNT 39 (1990), pp. 59-76

THE PRESENCE AND SIGNIFICANCE OF LUKANISMS IN THE 'WESTERN' TEXT OF ACTS Thomas C. Geer, Jr

Although it has long been recognized that the additional and different material in Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis shares many of the characteristics of the Alexandrian tradition in Acts, there has been a resurgence of interest in this phenomenon in the past decade. This renewed interest is observable in one two-volume book and several articles, the conclusions of which have ranged from arguing that the 'Western' text of Acts contains some original readings, to attempting to resurrect, or at least give more plausibility to, Friedrich Blass's theory that both the Egyptian and 'Western' texts of Acts are from Luke. This paper is a critique of five of these more recent studies and of the attempt to resurrect Blass's theory. Max Wilcox: Luke and the Bezan Text of Acts1 Although Wilcox's study is quite short, he raises some very significant points, and his conclusions serve as a basis for the later studies. He agrees in principle with Phillippe H. Menoud's2 and Eldon J. Epp's3 basic understanding of Codex Bezae, that is, that it emphasizes certain aspects already found in the Egyptian tradition. However, since Codex Bezae does not introduce 'new' material, but seems to build on what is 1. M. Wilcox, 'Luke and the Bezan Text in Acts', in J. Kremer (ed.), Les actes des apotres (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1979), pp. 447-55. 2. P.H. Menoud, The Western Text and the Theology of Acts', in Jesus Christ and the Faith (trans. E.M. Paul; Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1978). 3. E.J. Epp, The Theological Tendency of Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis in Acts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966).

GEER Lukanisms in the 'Western' Text of Acts

35

already there, Wilcox concludes, The whole picture of D's supposed "tendency" looks suspiciously like a more exaggerated version of the Lukan standpoint'.4 Wilcox then conducts a 'stylistic and linguistic analysis of the "special" material in the Bezan text of Acts'.5 He discusses three aspects of this analysis: (1) shorter stylistic additions; (2) additions of substance; (3) quotational elements. 1. Shorter stylistic additions. Wilcox concludes that of ninety-one individual words 'added' in the Bezan text of Acts as isolated elements, thirty-four are accepted Lukan favorites, that is, 37.3% of the additions are Lukanisms. Wilcox concludes this section: 'Even if we allow that statistical arguments are not without their dangers, the Bezan "retouching" of Acts (if "retouching" it really is) has certainly been done in a very Lukan style indeed'.6 2. Additions of substance. The next and more substantial part of Wilcox's article deals with three longer Bezan additions. These 'additions of substance' are, according to Wilcox, additions from three words up to twenty-eight words in a verse. He states that the 127 lines, or 580 words, added in Codex Bezae contain no fewer than sixty-five Lukanisms (or 11.2%). Wilcox then briefly discusses three longer blocks of unique Bezan material (located at 11.2; 16.39; 19.14). Within the addition at 11.2, Wilcox finds that 17.85% of the extra material is Lukan; in the addition at 16.39, 19.4%; and at 19.14, 17.4% of the added material is Lukan in style. Since Lukanisms occur in the Egyptian text of Acts at a 9.15% level, Wilcox concludes that these three Bezan additions demonstrate a text approximately doubly Lukan compared to the Egyptian text. 3. Quotational elements. Wilcox mentions five places in Acts where the Bezan text alludes more fully to the LXX text than does the Egyptian tradition. Although Wilcox does not say it, this is apparently supposed to reflect Luke's own practice, as evidenced in Lk. 3.4-6. Wilcox concludes his study: We are not proposing to resurrect the 'Double-edition' theory of Blass, although that theory may now seem to have a slightly greater degree of plausibility. Rather, we note that the differences between the two texttypes of Acts recall those between the Synoptic Gospels, and in a way, between the various forms of the Palestinian Pentateuch Targum tradition. One wonders whether Martin Dibelius did not put his finger on the matter 4. 5. 6.

Wilcox, 'Luke and the Bezan Text in Acts', p. 448. Wilcox, 'Luke and the Bezan Text in Acts', p. 448. Wilcox, 'Luke and the Bezan Text in Acts', p. 449.

36

New Testament Text and Language when he argued that Acts, unlike the Gospels, was in a way a literary text before it became a canonical Church book. What we have before us are probably two distinct revisions of one original Lukan work, which have had a somewhat separate development. But if so, that would only heighten the need for us to take individual readings of D rather more seriously than is all too often done.7

Although Wilcox certainly points out some interesting phenomena, his study presents some major difficulties. A primary concern centers on the validity of some of the unstated presuppositions. Particularly difficult in this case is the assumption that if a word or phrase (his 'shorter stylistic additions') can be shown to be a favorite Lukan word or phrase, and it occurs frequently in another document, then the second text must also be from Luke. Another difficulty concerns the validity of taking three longer additions in Codex Bezae, finding in them a relatively high level of Lukanisms, comparing that to the total percentage of Lukanisms in Codex Vaticanus, and concluding that Codex Bezae is more Lukan than Codex Vaticanus. Should not all of Codex Bezae be compared with all of Codex Vaticanus before such a sweeping generalization is made? And then, even if one accepts Wilcox's statistics as valid, how concentrated with Lukanisms must a longer addition be before it is too 'Lukan' to be from Luke? That is, if 9.15% of the accepted Lukan text consists of Lukanisms, what about a text that consists of Lukanisms at an 18% level? Does it not begin to overstep how we would expect an author to write? Additionally, Wilcox observes that in the case of some of the variant readings where either or both of the D and B readings is/are Lukan the text of Codex Bezae is 80.3% Lukan and Vaticanus is 35.7% Lukan. With this kind of manipulation of the statistics one can only wonder how Wilcox can, with good conscience, use the Egyptian tradition as the basis for determining Luke's style in the first place. But that aside, does not Bezae's 'extra-Lukan' flavor more likely suggest the work of a scribe who was concerned to add elements to his text of Acts, and to do it in as Lukan a manner as possible? The third section of Wilcox's article, the quotational elements, seems to distract from his thesis rather than add to it. He draws no conclusions from his brief observations of this phenomenon. It should be noted that two of his examples (7.21, 30) are certainly less than adaptations to the LXX by Codex Bezae. The most interesting thing of this sort occurs at 7.

Wilcox, 'Luke and the Bezan Text in Acts', p. 445.

GEER Lukanisms in the 'Western' Text of Acts

37

Acts 13.33, but it seems just as likely that a scribe extended the quotation of the Psalm to reach the next verse in imitation of Lk. 3.4-6, as that Luke is responsible for the addition, but it somehow got lost in all but one small corner of the textual tradition. Certainly Wilcox has isolated some interesting phenomena, and he has, to his credit, worked with real texts. But he has not adequately explained the phenomena, for his suggestions are based on very small segments of text and on questionable uses of statistics. M.-E. Boismard: The Text of Acts: A Problem of Literary Criticism?* Boismard builds on the idea suggested by Wilcox that the relationship between the Egyptian and 'Western' textual traditions is a matter of literary criticism. He begins by indicating his interest in Blass's theory, and states that after examining closely two 'Western' additions, at 11.2 and 19.1, he discovered that the 'Western' text has 'an undeniable "Lukan" style, which cannot possibly be the work of a skillful imitator of Luke's style'.9 Boismard first discusses Acts 1 1.2: Egyptian Text

'Western ' Text

Boismard finds the Egyptian textual tradition sufficiently Lukan at this point. However, he makes nine points about the 'Western' text, attempting to demonstrate its own Lukan style. 8. M.-E. Boismard, The Text of Acts: A Problem of Literary Criticism?', in E.J. Epp and G.D. Fee (eds.), New Testament Textual Criticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 147-57. 9. Boismard, 'The Text of Acts', p. 148.

38

New Testament Text and Language

1. |Liev oxiv is found more frequently in Acts than in the rest of the New Testament, and it is only in Acts in the New Testament that jiev O'Bv is inserted between an article and its substantive. Additionally, the exact phrase 6 |uev o\)v rieipoq is found in Acts 12.5. It should also be noted that Codex Bezae apparently changes the text at 17.14 to create the same kind of construction. As Boismard notes, the construction is quite classical; furthermore (Boismard does not mention this), jiev ow occurs fairly frequently in the LXX (cf. Gen. 43.4; Exod. 4.23; 9.2; Wis. 16.16; 2 Mace. 11.18, 19; 3 Mace. 2.31; 3.11; 4.15; 5.9; 4 Mace. 1.7, 22). The exact construction Boismard notes, that of jnev ovv being inserted between the article and the noun, also occurs several times in the LXX (cf. Est. 8.14; Dan. 3.23 LXX; 2 Mace. 7.12; 9.28; 3 Mace. 2.1; 4 Mace. 1.10; 3.9). So jnev ow was commonly used, and its appearance in Codex Bezae at 11.2, though interesting, certainly does not prove that it came from Luke. 2. Boismard next suggests that iKavoq is a Lukanism, and that only in Acts/Luke does iicavoq accompany xpovoq. Again, the phenomenon is interesting, but according to Liddell-Scott, iicavoq was rather commonly used in classical Greek as a modifier for %povoyr|6r|aovTai ev a\rao Tcdvia id e0vr| Tfj