Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New TestamentNestle, Eberhard
Religion
Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament
Nestle, Eberhard
Bible. New Testament -- Criticism, Textual
In certain manuscripts prior to the time of Origen, the =Doxology= was
found between xiv. 23 and xv. 1. It now stands after xiv. 23 in A L P
and about 200 minuscules, while at the same time the epistle is
certainly continued to xv. 13. Bengel alone has suggested a reason for
this. He supposes that the solemn words in xiv. 23, πᾶν δὲ ὃ οὐκ ἐκ
πίστεως ἁμαρτία ἐστίν, were felt to form an unsatisfactory close to a
church lection, and that the doxology was accordingly inserted here.
Moreover, seeing that no part of xvi. 1-25 was included in any lection,
this would be an additional reason for attaching the doxology to the end
of chapter xiv., as otherwise this grand passage might not be read at
all. It must be confessed, however, that this explanation is not
altogether satisfactory.
It is further to be observed that the =Benediction= is found sometimes
after xvi. 20, sometimes after xvi. 23, and sometimes in both places. In
the last case it is found under three conditions: (1) before the
doxology, (2) without it, (3) after it. With regard to the single
Benediction, it is inserted after verse 20 in א A B C, and after verse
23 in D G. An explanation of these variations has frequently been sought
in the supposition that chapter xvi. is part of an epistle addressed to
Ephesus, which has in some way been incorporated in the Epistle to the
Romans. On this supposition the only question is whether the whole of
chapter xvi. belongs to this Ephesian epistle or only the first twenty
verses, while verses 21-23 belong to the original Epistle to the Romans.
Improbable as this may appear at the first glance, it admits of an easy
explanation. It may be due to the fact that Romans once stood at the end
of the collection of Pauline epistles. Or we may suppose that the
commendatory epistle for Phœbe addressed to Ephesus and the Epistle to
the Romans were written at the same time, and that in sending them off,
the sheet containing the former by some mistake slipped in before the
last sheet of the Roman epistle. On this view, the first benediction in
verse 20, ἡ χάρις ... μεθ’ ὑμῶν, would belong to the Ephesian epistle,
while the second, ἡ χάρις ... μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν to the Roman. The uncial
L would then be right in retaining both, while D E F G will have omitted
the benediction the first time it occurred, and א A B C the second time.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account