CX

I'm working on a lengthy essay that outlines all the MSS evidence for the NT in the first 3 centuries of the common era. Up to now I have only considered Greek MSS. Does anyone think it would be worthwhile to include patristic writings, lectionaries and/or versions?

[ August 20, 2002: Message edited by: CX ]</p>

Jayhawker Soule

I'm embarrassed to admit that I don't know enough about the topic (or, for that matter, about what you're seeking to prove/accomplish) to have an opinion. Nevertheless, I'd love to see examples of how the latter serve as evidence.

not a theist

For patristic writings, you would have to consider the date of the actual manuscripts we have rather than the date of the original manuscripts. So do we even have any manuscripts of the patristic writings which date back to the first 3 centuries?

CX

That's certainly a valid point and reason I have not considered anything but Greek MSS up to now. Unfortunately I am largely deficient in my knowledge of the ante-nicene fathers so I was hoping for some input from someone who might know. Cataloguing and analysing the 46 Greek MSS we have that are dated before the 4th century is daunting enough.

Bede

CX, on a totally practical level I recommend sticking to the papyrus and codices for now. It is what you know about. So get that article down before moving on to larger topics. Otherwise, things grow so much they never get finished.

Yours with loads of unfinished projects

Bede

<a href="http://www.bede.org.uk" target="_blank">Bede's Library - faith and reason</a>

CX

That's rather what I was thinking last night. I spent about 2 hours going over the Beatty Papyri p45 & p46. My notes are almost complete. I have a few more MSS to look at and then I can start writing in earnest. I wonder do you think it would be better to organize by date or by book of the NT?

Bede

What I think would be most useful is to be able to look up any verse and see what the earliest attestation is. So by book rather than date. You could include a summary list but there is already a good table of papyrus and codices somewhere on the web (which we both know well but I can't remember the URL).

B

Peter Kirby

I do not believe that the ante-Nicene fathers can have value as witnesses to the NT text only if there are extant manuscripts from the first three centuries. Unless there is evidence or at least motivation for the insertion of a particular reference in a patristic author, then a reference in a church father shows that the passage was in the NT by the time of writing at the latest, although the precise wording might not be confirmed due to the potentiality of scribal assimilation to the known scriptural text.

But I suggest starting with the Greek manuscripts and then looking into the translations and quotations as you have the time and interest. One thing that I am thinking about is writing a program that will search the online Ante-Nicene Fathers to extract information about scriptural references from the footnotes. The completion of such a project would be a great boon to anyone studying the relationship of the church fathers to NT text criticism.

best,
Peter Kirby