No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Papyrus Bodmer II (P66) and John 8, 25
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 August 2011
Extract
The importance of Papyrus Bodmer II, to be designated P66 for textual studies can scarcely be overlooked, even in an age accustomed to startling discoveries in the biblical field. The scholarly world is indebted to Professor Victor Martin for prompt publication, and it is to be hoped that a facsimile will follow.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1958
References
1 Victor Martin, Papyrus Bodmer II: Evangile de Jean, chap. 1–14 (Bibliotheca Bodmeriana, 1956). An excellent study of the text of P66 by M.-E. Boismard appeared in RB LXIV, 1957, 363–398, too late to be considered here.
2 Ibid., p. 12 f.
3 Ibid., p. 7.
4 The editor counts more than 150 errors due to inattention. Corrections have been made in several ways: by cancelling the letter(s), usually with a dot placed over the letter (and enclosing the series in parentheses), or by erasure; additions are made by squeezing the letters into the same line, or by supralinear or marginal additions. Ibid., pp. 30 ff.
5 Ibid., p. 11. Metzger, B. M. in “106 Precious Pages: A description and evaluation of a newly discovered important manuscript of St. John's Gospel,” The Living Church, CXXXIV (Feb. 24, 1957), 9Google Scholar, reports that some lost portions of the manuscript have appeared.
6 Bultmann, Rudolf, Das Evangelium des Johannes (Göttingen, 1950), pp. 266, 268.Google Scholar
7 The adopted reading, “Even what I told you from the beginning,” is inadmissible from the standpoint of the Greek: the present tense of λαλῶ forbids it; the marginal reading is “Why do I speak to you at all?”
8 Op. cit., p. 31.
9 Op. cit., p. 30; cf. Metzger's remarks, op. cit., 10: “At the same time, because the scribe has been at pains to correct his initial carelessness, we have, paradoxically, a firmer assurance, than would be the case in a document without corrections, that the completed work represents a tolerably correct copy of the exemplar from which it was made. Furthermore, the presence here and there in the text of small crochetshaped marks (which ancient scribes would sometimes put at the end of a line in order to make the right hand margin come out even) suggests that the scribe copied his exemplar quite mechanically, even to the extent of carrying over these marks though they might fall at positions other than at the ends of lines in the Bodmer manuscript.” Cf. also n. 4 above.
10 Corrections are indicated by . / . at the following points: 14.11 (3,17), 16.16 (3,31), 23.5 (4,39). 39.14 (6,40), 41.11 (6,54), 42.8 (6,60), 43.2 (6,64), 49.21 (7.37), 54.13 (8,25), 63.6 (9,18), 65.6 (9,30), 66.9 (9,39), 68.13 (10,10), 73.2 (10,36), 74.16 (11,5), 75.3 (11,7). 80.12 (11,41), 99.4 (13,16), 105.16 (14,12); in addition, . / . appears at 2.18 (1,14) with nothing corresponding in the margin, nor is anything missing.
11 E.g., 14.11 (3, 17), 23.5 (4,39), 39.14 (6,40), 41.11 (6,54), etc.
12 Initium/principium quod/qui/quia (et): under the influence of Rev. 21,6; 22,13, principium could be taken as nominative, “I am the beginning …”
13 Bernard, J. H., The Gospel According to St. John (Scribner's, 1929), II, 302.Google Scholar
14 Chrysostom apparently so understood it; cf. Abbott, E. A., Johannine Grammar (London, 1906), p. 143Google Scholar and Arndt, W. F. and Gingrich, F. W., A Greek-English Lexicon (Chicago, 1957)Google Scholar, s.v. ἀρχή, I, b.
15 Blass-Debrunner, , Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch (Neunte Auflage; Göttingen, 1954), § 300, 2.Google Scholar
16 C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John (Macmillan, n.d.), p. 283 f.; Abbott, op. cit., p. 144; Hoskyns, and Davey, , The Fourth Gospel (London, 1947), p. 336.Google Scholar
17 Bernard, op. cit., p. 301.
18 An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Oxford, 1946), pp. 172 ff.Google Scholar Black finds it necessary (1) to rearrange the text; (2) to correct a double mistranslation. (1) He removes 25a to a place before 28 (cf. Bultmann), and inserts the troublesome phrase into the protasis of 24b; (2) τὴν ἀρχήν is a mistranslation for רשאי “empowered,” and ὅτι represents ךי. Thus: “Unless you believe that I have full authority who speak to you, ye will die in your sins.” This passage has apparently been deleted from the 2nd edition, 1954, though John 8,25 is still listed in the index.
19 Zahn, Theodor, Das Evangelium des Johannes (3. und 4. Auflage; Leipzig, 1912), p. 410Google Scholar.
20 For references, see Arndt and Gingrich, op. cit.
21 Hdt. 2, 28; 8, 132; Thuc. 2, 74, 3; further, see Bultmann, op. cit., p. 267, n. 4; for numerous examples in the papyri, see Preisigke, , Wörterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden (Berlin, 1925), ad loc.Google Scholar
22 In the fourth Gospel ἀρχή is used either of the creation (1,1,2; 8,44) or of the beginning of the public ministry (2,11; 6,64; 15,24 16,4).
23 In this case ὅτι must be taken interrogatively, an interpretation which is possible, but which finds little clear support in the New Testament; and which necessitates taking σὺ τίς εῖ as a contemptuous question. The latter leads Bultmann to conclude, and rightly, that 26 f. does not belong to this context.
24 See n. 5.
25 Bultmann, op. cit., pp. 264–67.
26 2,4; 3,10–13; 10,25 f.; 14,9; 18,20 f. to say nothing of other instances where a preliminary reply calls for further explanation.
27 Andoc. 3, 20; Gen. 41,21; etc.
28 4,27; 17,1; 18.21; 12,41.