tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post3794890046801906061..comments2024-03-20T12:35:12.828-04:00Comments on The Text of the Gospels: Hand-to-Hand Combat: P38 vs. GA 2401 (Round 1)James Snapp Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-56480525299958392812018-12-15T18:10:39.181-05:002018-12-15T18:10:39.181-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Daniel Buckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02600146498880358592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-7189177359367023122018-12-14T11:56:26.865-05:002018-12-14T11:56:26.865-05:00Thanks Joey McCollum; that was terrific.Thanks Joey McCollum; that was terrific.James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-10383523686440790182018-12-14T01:23:54.245-05:002018-12-14T01:23:54.245-05:00GA P38
Given its close relationship to D, P38 pro...GA P38<br /><br />Given its close relationship to D, P38 probably substitutes ος επιδημησας for ος παραγενομενος in 18:27, but since only the final sigma is extant, we can't say for sure; we'll assume no difference to be conservative here.<br /><br />18:27 - P38 adds τη αχαια after ος παραγενομενος. (Translatable)<br />18:28 - P38 adds δια̣[λεγομεν]ος̣ after δημοσια. (Translatable)<br />18:28 - P38 omits τον before χριστον. (Article)<br />19:1 - P38 and D change so much material in this verse that I couldn't find a good way to divide up the points of variation. Much of the content from Εγενετο δε to εις Εφεσον is rearranged through transposition, conjugation, and substitution of vocabulary. Near the end of the verse, the phrase και ευρειν τινας μαθητας, dependent on the preceding material, is dropped in P38. This is a very significant difference. (Translatable)<br />19:2 - P38 substitutes κ̣α̣ι̣ [ειπεν τοι]ς μαθηταις for ειπεν τε προς αυτους. (Conjunction, clarification of referent) <br /><br />This would more properly be grouped with the previous variation unit, as the substitution for the pronoun αυτους is likely occasioned by the absence of the phrase τινας μαθητας in the previous verse.<br /><br />19:2 - P38 adds απεκρεινα[ντο] after οι δε. (Translatable)<br />19:2 - P38 substitutes λαμβαν̣[ουσιν τι]ν̣ες̣ for εστιν after πνευμα αγι̣ον̣. (Translatable)<br />19:3 - P38 substitutes ο δε Παυλος προς αυτους for ειπεν τε. (Translatable)<br /><br />Again, this may be considered related to the variant at the beginning of v 2; since there was no τε there, a second one here wouldn't fit as well. Moreover, one clarification of referent was made, and the clarifying phrase προς αυτους was supplied.<br /><br />19:3 - P38 substitutes ελεγον for ειπαν. (Conjugation)<br />19:4 - I didn't see any variation here, either.<br /><br />In 19:5, there's enough space after κυριον in P38 to fit the word ημων, which would result in the expanded nomen sacrum του κ̅[υ̅] [ημων] [ι̅η̅υ̅] [χ̅ρ̅υ̅]; unfortunately, the text is not extant, so we can't say much else.<br /><br />19:5 - P38 adds [εις αφεσιν αμαρ]τ̣ι̣ων at the end of the verse. (Translatable)<br /><br />19:6 - P38 adds ε̣υ̣θ̣[εως] after χειρας. (Translatable) I got this one from the transcription, but I must admit, I'm having a hard time seeing it myself.<br /><br />The total here is 11 coarse differences (5 additions, 1 omission, 5 substitutions), but this doesn't account for the weight of the change made to 19:1 in its entirety. Even if we only count that as a single point of variation, 8 of the 11 differences between P38 and NA27 are translatable and likely genealogically significant. So while our collation data may differ in some respects, I would agree with your conclusions on the accuracy of the scribes of 2401 and P38 relative to the NA27 base text.Joey McCollumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17352192479713307345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6346409181794331060.post-17595358659523680482018-12-14T01:23:37.733-05:002018-12-14T01:23:37.733-05:00Me? :)
I checked the microfilms for the relevant ...Me? :)<br /><br />I checked the microfilms for the relevant pages of 2401 and the transcription and images for P38 on the NTVMR. My collation follows:<br /><br />GA 2401<br /><br />18:27 - The entire phrase ος παραγενομενος εις την αχαιαν is in darker ink, so it's possible that the original reading of 2401 was either ος παραγενομενος or possibly ος επιδημησας. Given that no manuscript is known to have the reading ος παραγενομενος without the addition of εις την αχαιαν, and given that the latter reading seems to be a D-P38 reading, the first option seems more likely; your assessment of the addition is probably right. (Translatable)<br />18:27 - 2401 substitutes πεπιστευκοσι for πεπιστευκοσιν. (Movable nu)<br />18:28 - 2401 substitutes διακατηλεγχε for διακατηλεγχετο. (Conjugation)<br />18:28 - 2401c adds διαλεγομενος και after δημοσια. (Translatable)<br />19:1 - 2401 substitutes ελθειν for κατελθειν. (Preposition)<br />19:1 - 2401 substitutes ευρων for ευρειν. (Conjugation)<br />19:2 - 2401 substitutes ειπε for ειπεν. (Movable nu)<br />19:2 - 2401 omits τε after ειπε. (Conjunction) <br /><br />It's worth noting that this variant is probably dependent on the substitution of ευρων at the end of the previous verse, and the combination of both variants renders a translatable difference that has some bearing on how we might divide the verses. In NA27, we have a text that could be translated, "Paul went through the upper region to come to Ephesus and to find some disciples. Then he said to them..." In 2401, the text could be rendered, "Paul went through the upper region to come to Ephesus. Finding some disciples, he said to them..."<br /><br />19:2 - 2401 adds ειπον after οι δε. (Translatable)<br />19:2 - 2401 substitutes ουδε for ουδ'. (Vowel elision)<br />19:3 - 2401 substitutes ειπε for ειπεν. (Movable nu)<br />19:3 - 2401 substitutes δε for τε. (Conjunction) <br /><br />This last variant may also be related to the ευρων / ευρειν variant in v 1 and the omission of τε in v 2; I haven't looked at Luke's usage throughout Acts, but I think the presence of τε in v 2 would warrant a second usage here, resulting in the sequence τε-τε-δε found in NA27. Without the initial τε, the sequence omit-δε-δε seems to me like it would be more natural.<br /><br />19:3 - 2401 adds προς αυτους after ειπε δε. (Translatable)<br />19:3 - 2401 substitutes ειπον for ειπαν. (Orthographic)<br />19:4 - 2401 substitutes ειπε for ειπεν. (Movable nu)<br />19:4 - 2401 adds μεν after Ιωαννης. (Conjunction)<br />19:4 - 2401 substitutes εβαπτισε for εβαπτισεν. (Movable nu)<br />19:4 - 2401 substitutes πιστευσωσι for πιστευσωσιν. (Movable nu)<br />19:4 - 2401 adds χριστον before Ιησουν. (Nomen sacrum expansion / contraction)<br />19:5 - I didn't see any variation, either.<br />19:6 - 2401 substitutes προεφητευον for επροφητευον. (Orthographic)<br /><br />In summary, I count 20 variants at this coarse level of detail (6 additions, 1 omission, 13 substitutions), 4 of which are translatable and not easily explained by a common mechanism (although the addition of ειπον after οι δε and the addition of προς αυτους after ειπε δε are not too hard to imagine a scribe supplying absentmindedly).Joey McCollumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17352192479713307345noreply@blogger.com