Subject: tc-list Re: Majority text -question from a beginner

From: [email-masked] (William L. Petersen)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 14:11:09 +0100

Steve Carson-Rowland writes:

>In an essay entitled 'The Significance of the Papyri for determining the
>nature of the NT text in the second century: A dynamic view of textual
>transmission' by Eldon Jay Epp (In 'Gospel Traditions in the Second
>Century', ed. William L. Peterson), the author writes:
>
><begin quote (p.92)>
>The "A" text cluster, that is, the 'accepted' text of the Koine or later
>Byzantine textual group, need not be further considered here, for the early
>papyri are not involved (although a few papyri of the 6th and 7th centuries
>do represent the "A" text). Furthermore, everyone recognises that this
>textual group exists, though not until the 4th century- that is, after the
>period of the earliest papyri. Moreover, everyone also acknowledges that
>this can actually be called a "text-type". The recognised constituent
>members can be found in standard handbooks.
><end quote>
>
>Firstly I found the statement a little confusing. Why mention the papyri of
>the 6th and 7th century if the textual group exists from the 4th century
>onwards? Is there any significance in Epp's parenthetic comment?

Reread Epp's title:  "The Significance *of the Papryi*..."  He mentions the
VI/VII cent. papyri because the papyri are the subject of his article, and
because, in the case of his "A"-text, these VI/VII cent. papyri are the
earliest *papyri* evidence for this text.

>
>Secondly, how clear is the evidence for the majority text not existing
>before the 4th century? There would be about 45 papyri dated up to the end
>of the 4th century, but many/most(?) of them with only a few verses - for
>example I have p77 as only having 10 verses, p12 with 1 verse, etc.

Crystal clear.  No manuscript, no father, no apocryphal work seems to know
or use it.  Check the handbooks (Metzger, *The Text of the NT*, Kenyon,
*The Text of the Greek Bible*).  While there are those who disagree, there
is a simple question to pose to them:  What second-century (or even
third-century) source uses the "majority text"?  There are many which
display the Western Text, and some which seem to display the so-called
Alexandrian Text.  For examples, see my chapter "What Text Can NT Textual
Criticism Ultimately Reach?" in *New Testament Textual Criticism, Exegesis
and Church History,* edd. B. Aland and J. Delobel, CBETh 7 (Kampen [the
Netherlands]: Kok/Pharos, 1994), pp. 136-152, or my *Tatian's Diatessaron,*
VigChr.S 25 (Leiden: Brill, 1994), pp. 9-26.

The archives of this list have numerous exchanges on the matter;  you would
do well to read them.

--Petersen, Penn State University,
Netherlands Institute for Advanced Studies.