❞ كتاب THE FOURTH GOSPEL WITH CANONICAL AND NONCANONICAL PARALLELS VARIANT READINGS AND MANUSCRIPT SUPPORT ❝ ⏤ قمصان شيلدون فينتون

Chapter
I. DEFINTIICN OF THE STUDY TO BE MADE. 2
n. mENTIFICATION OF THE MATERIAlS TO BE CITID OR USED • lO
In. EXPLANATION OF PROCEDURE AND APPARATUS TO BE FOLLOWID 27
PART n. GOSPEL OF JOON Wl1'H VARIANTS AND PARA.LIEI.S
I. JCHN l •• . . . . . . . n. Jam 2. •
m. J(JUI J •• . . . . . IV. JCHN 4 •• 66
v. Jam s. • 74
VI. JCIIH 6. 85
m. JOHN 7:l..S:ll • 100
vm. JaiN 8:12-59. . . . . ll4
IL JOON 9 •• 125
L JCHN lO • 131
II. JCIIH ll . . . . . xn. JCIIH 12 • 151
xni. JCIDI l3 165

ri.

IIV. Jam 14 • . . . . . I.V. JOHN 15:1-16:4& •
I.VI. JCHN 16:41>-33 . . I.VII. JOHN 17 • . . . . . . . . I.VIII. JCIIN 18:1-19:16 . . III. Jam 19:17-42 • . . . . .. . lL Jam 20
.III. JOON 21 . .-

PART III. NarES AND ~
I. NOTES ON THE VARIANTS AND THE PAR411.iJS •
II. JOON 1S RELATION TO T'rlE PARALLELS •••••
. .

III. SUCI;ESTIONS FOR EVALU.ATBG THE VAJrrJ.Jlr REi<DINGS
-· ..
175
185
194
201
208
219
226
235

244
m
286

It shall be the plan o~ this dissertation to provide, along 'With
the English text or the Gospel or John, significant Yariant readings
ld.t..lt the chief support o~ 'Witnesses ~or each reading, together ldth both
canonical and noncanonical.-<:hristian parallels fran basicall7 the ~irst
t"MO centuries A.D.

Definition of Terms Found in the Statem~ of Plan

The Fl:lglish Text

The text that shall be used is that o~ the Reri..sed Standard Ver-
si.ao, 1965,1 ..mich incorporates all the changes in punctuation and wrd-
ing that have been authorized by' the translation calllli.ttee s:l.nce the New

Testament of this version was ~irst released in 1946 and the Old Testa-
.... in 1952.

The Goepel of John

'l'his iB also re~erred to as the Fourth Gospel, !raa its plac-ent
in our present New Testament canon. It is not within tbe scope of this
cliaaertation to settle such a question as the authorship o~ this Gospel.

Therefore the name •John• shall be used, meaning llbatew'er person is be-
biDd the name, and from this point on the name shall be used without

l'fhe Hol.y Bible; Revised stamard Version (!lev York: Calllns'
Clear-TJpe Press, 1965).

2

quotation aarka.

Signi!icant Variant Readings

The greatest number of variant readings that will be cited are

those based oo. divergent readings of Greek manuscripts and versions, read-
inga lihi.ch affect in some measure of si.gni!icance the meaning of a giTen

passage. Every such variant noted in the ::1argins of the English Tersions
being consulted has been included, together with many others. Thus are

included maD7 of the changes intentionally made by scribes for theologi-
cal, hanlonisti.c, stylistic, or practical reasons.

In addition, two other kinds of variants of lesser signi.ficance
have also been included. Variants that illustrate types of accidental
changes cau.sed by scribal errors of eye, ear, or mind are often giTen to
. 8hov 1lbat has frequently happened in the transmission of the Greek text •
.Also, varl.aats in the English versions consulted have sometimes been
cited, eTen wben no Greek Tariant is involved, if the English variations
affect. the aeaning or clarity of a statement.
On t.be other hand, not to be included are those Greek variants
inYolrlng cbaDges of spelling, !om or order of words, if no or only
alight. effect. 011 meaning is involved. In the same manner, if Eogl.ish

nriaats are sli8ht and do not basically affect meaning, they are ig-
nored, except. in a .rev marginal cases in which the English version is

groaped with the reading with which it basically agrees but its variant
reading is aLso given.

Chiet Support of Witnesses

For flnlr7 listed nria.nt, the knolftl witness support !or each read-
ing vill be cited !rom eve17 paJlYl"US and uncial manuscript of the first

seTen centuries A.D. plus the important 11Koine11 group of later uncials
E F G H; and !ran the still later minuscule manuscripts, the readings of

t~«> important families o! Greek manuscripts - known as Family 1 and Faa-
117 l.J - will be given.

In addition, there will be recorded the support of the chief
versions o! these early centuries - Itala, Vulgate, Syria.c, Coptic,
Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Georgian - and also the support o! the
Church Fathers through the third centucy, plus these important leader:s
o! the next century, Athanasius, Chr';-sostom, Epiphanius, Eu.sebius, and
Jercme. And fi.nal.ly will be noted the readings found in the English
Teraiona authorized by Protestant Christian:s and currently used: the
Xing James, the American Standard, the Revised Standard, and the Nsw
Erlgliah Bibl.e. Such is the rule; there will be an occasional exception.
Fran time t.o time the reading o! some witness outside the time limits
here defined v:Ul be given for the enlighte=ent or interest it m;q
produce.

Canonical

It i.s here usumed that this term m;q be legitimately applied to
all o! the JJew Testament books and to all o! the books that are found in
the Septuagint ver:sion of the Old Testament, in view of the !act that John
ca:~Sisteutly show that it is that version of his scriptures that he uses.

JJoncanonical-chri:stian

Cit.atioos are made from other Chri:stian wzitings, the:se found out-
ride the canon, that come from buical.ly the first two centuries A.D. These

~es 1dll be identiried in the next chapter.

s
Parallels

Admittedly here is a term that in this area of study no two per-
sons seea to define the same, for there are many degrees of similarity be-
tween. John and other works, a fa.ct that makes any attempt to draw sharp

lines dll'!icult if not unrealistic. But still some guide lines have been
recognized in pursuit of a wrking definition. To be quickly discarded
are those distant 11 echoes11 or "reminiscences" which link John to sane
other IIOIU"ee by only some one unimportant 1o10rd or in only the broadest
~· Similarly, the mere presence of even an important Johannine word
like Logos - "iiord" - is nat enough to clailll a oarallel if the use or

the term is foreign to the way John used it. Ckl the other hand, one rea-
sonab!Jr c:lear-eut link between John and some other source at least in-
creases the possibility · .. hat another less clearly recognized link to the

aame wl'k ~ still truly be one.
There are three wa,ys in which a parallel relationship can be
cla:illled: Jobn can refer to or show reasonabl~ dependence on some otller
aource; -e other source can reter to or show reasonable dependence on
John; or the tw can bear enough similarity to each other that if one
does DDt depend on the other, they then can alllce depend on a third
source c-to both of them. This c0111111on source can be either written
or oral. • reasonable parallel was felt to exist, of course, llhen the
nature or the relationship was clearly liter&rT or verbal, but so vas
it tbougbt a parallel 11ben there vas c:lear conceJ*.ual .affinity. After
coneideration was given to all these factors, the attempt. was then made
to arrive at tw levels of parallels, to be called "major" and •minor,•
the 4if!e:reDCe between them being chiefiT the degree of more or l.eu
closeness 1D relationship respectivel,y.

For a "major" parallel, Webster's definition 'Was acceptedz
•something equal or similar in all essential details.nl It was felt
that this degree o! closeness was met, with regard to John's relation to
the Old Testament, !or instance, when he in 2:17 with the formula •it
ia written• quoted Fs. 69:9 (68:10 LXI), or to the synoptic Gospels
ltlen with many similar -..ords 10hey dealt with a cOIDIDOn event like the
feeding of the five thousand, or to Justin when Justin's statement
(Apology I 61.4,5) so closely paralleled Jn. 3:3,4.2
For a •minora parallel, *ebster's next definition was accepted:
•comparison to show resemblance; a tracing of similarity.•3 It was felt
that this reduced degree o! closeness was met llhen John and a synoptic
Gospel dealt with the sme event but with less verbal agreement than in

the •major• parallels or perhaps with some contradiction of major de-
tall, or llhen Terbal agree:nent may even have been complete but the t-..o

accounts were dealing with different events. Perhaps the l0111est degree

of closeness, but still s...,.ingly qualifYing by the dictionary de!ini-
tion, could be illustrated by the comparing of a case of telepathic

healing in John to another case of telepathic healing in Matthew, or
llhen John records (1:21.) the question asking it the Baptist was Elijah
and one ill directed to Ma:t. 4:5 'llhere it was promilled that Elijah 'WOUld
come. But even here the parallel seemed to be both legitimate and bel~
lPhilip B. Gove (ed.), Webster's Third International Dictionar.y
of the l!hglish Language (Springf'ield, Mass.: G. and C. Merriam Co.,
196i), P• 1637.

2It should be remeabered that llhen a noncanonical source dupli-
cates ex.act.l.Jr a J ohannine statB:le!It, it is not listed in this study as a parallel but is used as a witness in support of the text as over against a n.riant. reading.

3Gove, op. cit., p. lb37.

to include, with one passage illuminating the other.
On the other hand, it was decided that for New Testament book8
other than the Gospels to qua.l.i!;y even as a Pdnor parallel, there had to

be some rttal element in their statement closer to John than to any oth-
er of the canonical Gospels; and with the noncanonical work8 there had to

be some Tital element closer to John than to any other book of the entire

canon. There is no claim that all legitimate parallels have here been in-
cluded, but it is hoped that the more significant ones have.

Definition of Other Terms Found in the
Treatment of John's Text.

In such a study- as this, certain key terms must be used. Thus the
.tol.lovillg definitions are o.!fered.

Pawru-
1'IWI term ori&f.nated as a designation of the Eg;yptian lGter-reed

p1..aDt !raa llhose stalks a Mriting material was made; then it referred

to that lfriting material, and .finally- to the Mritten document. The ear-
liest Greek manuscripts o.r John (or of a:ny other New Testament book) are

111'ittc on pawrus, and are called pap;yri. Following the international.1.7
recogoized Gregor;y system far DOtating Greek New Testament JDaliUScript.s
(abbrerl.ation MSS), pap;yri are designated bT the capital P in the old
Genlan script. plus an Arabic .IJUIIIeral - e.g., p66.
V..Uma

J. fine-grained la'iting aaterial wu made fran the skins o.r cattle

ar other aniaals, preferabl.7 the 7oang, and wu called parehlaent ar Tel-
l.-. J.lthoagh in use earlier (2 Tht. 4:13 mentiona •the parchments.,

nl.lwa had by the fourth century replaced papyl"US as the writing material
tor Biblical manuscripts.

Uueial

Fran a Latin liOrd meaning •a tve.U'th part, 11 this term came to re-
fer to capital letters; and inasmuch as, till the ninth century, manu-
scripts were written almost exclusivelJ' in capital letters, the manuscripts

themselves came to be called uncials. In the Gregory system, uncials are
indicated by a cipher before an Arabic ll'IDieral - e.g., 060.

Hinuscale

Fran a Latin word meaning •rather snaller,• this term came to be
applied to manuscripts written in small letters tlhich were often connected
with each other. Minuscule Greek IIL8JIWICri.pts began appearing in the ninth

cent1U7 and replaced the uncial type by the eleventh. In the Gregory sys-
ta, minuscules are notated with just an Arabic numeral - e.g., 225.

Coda;

'fbi8 indicates a bound book witb leaves, in contrast to the earli-
er book fcma of the roll. Christians aesa to have pioneered in· the use

of the coda:, with Christian papyrus calices making their appearance be-
gimling early in the second century A.D.

Tend.ca

u the Gospel spread to people W1o did not use the language or
the originalli'ev Testament, which 1AII Greek, translations hsd to be made
iDto other languages, and these transl.at.ians are called versions. .Those
Yeraiooa included in this study were maed on page !ou!'. Tbe;y provide
illportant. help in determining the original. .ording or scripture. Later,

the term is applied also to English translations of the Bible.