Re: Hebrews 12:15

Paul Ellingworth in his 1993 commentary on Hebrews accepts enoxle on 
the basis of the "overwhelming extrnal evidence for <GK>enoxle<gk>" 
and because it "disturbs the balance of the three <GK>me tis<gk> 
phrases or clauses in vv. 15f., and is thus the harder reading" (pp 
663-64).  He thinks it likely the writer reproduced a LXX text that 
had the <GK>enoxle<gk> reading.  He notes Blas-Debrunner Section 165 
and also Leonard's 1939 commentary as having more discussion.

Glenn Wooden
Acadia Divinity College, N.S.

> What is the current status of the
>    enoxle (troubling)   /   en xole (in gall)
> debate in Hebrews 12:15?
> The more recent Nestle editions indicate that Chester Beatty II,
> papyrus P46, attests to the second reading, and reference Peter
> Katz's paper from 1958 ("The Quotations from Deuteronomy in
> Hebrews," Zeitschrift fuer die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
> und die Kunde der Aeltern Kirche, vol. 49, pp. 213-223, 1958).
> Katz's conclusion, p. 217, is "Consequently, enoxle, which
> cannot be genuine in the LXX, is unlikely to be so in Hebrews.
> It is a mere corruption which originated during the course of
> transmission of Hebrews, at a date early enough to influence
> our great MSS in Deut., too; en xole is the true reading in
> both" (p. 217).
> But still this reading is usually only in the critical apparatus,
> and I have not seen any English translation which uses this text.
> The UBS3 text doesn't mention the variant.
> I have also looked into Rahlf's LXX, BHS and the Hatch & Redpath's
> LXX concordance regarding the translation of Hebrew rosh to Greek
> xole, and it seems that based on Hebrew and LXX, the correct
> reading is en xole.
> Is there a good textual argument for retaining enoxle?  Was P46
> (ca. AD200) a correction to a better translation of
> Deut. 29:18 (17), and the other wittnesses (Sinaiticus, A, 048,
> D, H, Psi, Majority, etc.) giving the original but perhaps
> incorrect reading?  Are there any other manuscripts besides
> P46 which support en xole?
> Thank you for any comments...
> Frank Hale      halefv@csa1.LBL.GOV