Subject: P46

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 12:35:07 -0500 (EST)

Regarding P46.  It of course does not solve all TC issues- as it is very
small and only contains minor portions of the whole NT.

Yet it deserves very special consideration as it is free of "type
influence".  It is very early (180 at the latest?).  And it is clearly
superior by all the canons of TC.  

Why, then, dismiss it when it has all the right stuff?

Jim

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Adjunct Professor of Bible, Quartz Hill School of Theology
[email-masked]

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 13:14:05 -0500 (EST)

> Why, then, dismiss it when it has all the right stuff?

And some think P46 might date to the AD 90-100 period.....but this also
does not make it correct.  When P46 stands alone in a non-error sensible
reading, are you quite prepared to accept and defend such?  And on what
grounds?

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

---

From: Matthew Johnson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 20:16:28 -0700 (PDT)

> influence".  It is very early (180 at the latest?).  And it is clearly

But according to Amphoux, the first recension of the Western text had 
already taken place, in about 135AD. So how can you say that P46 is free 
of type influence?

> superior by all the canons of TC.  > 

I don't think anyone is arguing that P46 should be _dismissed_.  Rather, 
some of us are extremely cautious of Western readings.  And we should 
be.  For although there are some very good readings in the Western text, 
there was also very little 'quality control' over the copying process in 
that era.  So sorting out the wheat from the chaff in Western readings is 
significantly more difficult than in the other text-types.

Personally, I will have a lot more confidence in modern textual 
criticism's ability to do this when the Vetus Latina Project is finished, 
and the results widely understood.  This will greatly simplify the job 
because of the close relation between the Old Latin text-types and the 
Western.

Matthew Johnson
Waiting for the blessed hope and the appearance of the glory of our 
great God and Saviour Jesus Christ (Ti 2:13).

---

From: "Robert B. Waltz" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 08:23:54 -0700

>already taken place, in about 135AD. So how can you say that P46 is free 

I can't see that the fact that the "Western" text was in existence in
135 has any necessary effect on p46. (I also doubt that there was a
"Wesrn" *recension* in 135, but that's not really relevant to the
argument.)

As far as I know, the best analysis of the so-called "Western" readings
in p46 remains that of Zuntz. Zuntz found that, where p46 has a
so-called "Western" reading, it is almost always ancient and not
characteristically "Western."

As I have noted many times before, I don't entirely agree with Zuntz
(he spent so much time examining p46 that there wasn't much energy left
over for other manuscripts). But I agree with him that those "Western"
readings of p46 (and B sa) are not, in fact, "Western"; they are
characteristic of the p46 text-type.

[ ... ]

>For although there are some very good readings in the Western text, 

I would agree that there is an urgent need for good work on the Old Latin
and its relation to the "Western" text. But I don't think this is quite
as urgent in Paul as in the Gospels or Acts. In Paul, the "Western"
text is relatively well-represented in Greek (with D F G and a handful
of readings in 629, though these likely come from the Latin). It is
also a much less wild edition; there are very few insertions of more than
a word or two. I think it perfectly possible to control the "Western"
text of Paul.

Bob Waltz
[email-masked]