TedM

That's true. I thought that was a little less clear. "Elders" seems fairly generic. Maybe it just means the more experienced older ones in the faith, as perhaps is the case with the "scribes and the elders" in the gospels?

Acts refers to the elders as "overseers" (20:17-18) and Titus apparantly equates them also (1:5-7).

In 1 Timothy, again their role isn't really described, only that they exist, and they deserve honor and they layed hands on Timothy while praying for him. I would think "elders" existed during Paul's day even if he didn't say much about them in his other letters.

Thanks for that, but I'm sorry I don't really understand what this means. This is the first I've heard that there may be grounds for disputing 1:1.


ted

S.C.Carlson

It means that there is one manuscript (P46, c. 200) that is missing 25 letters at the beginning of Philippian, which could neatly encompass "with the bishops and deacons" or some other phrase of the same length. Unfortunately, we cannot be sure exactly what the omission is because the page is missing.

In other words, there is slim, but not wholly non-existent, evidence for disputing "with the bishops and deacons" on textual grounds.

Stephen

TedM

Oh, ok. It isn't as though we have a complete page with that phrase missing. We actually are missing a piece of the document and I guess we can tell that 25 letters are missing. The question is what did those letters say. Since the only texts we have include the phrase in question any attempt to say that what is missing is something else is not really supported by anything but guesswork. It's a 'could have said' argument, and it really isn't based on evidence. It's based on a lack of evidence. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks again,

ted

S.C.Carlson

That's basically right, except that it is based on evidence of a lack (of 25 letters) as Skeat's calculations show. Unfortunately, we don't exactly know what that lack is.

Stephen