Re: Lk 23:14, an insertion??
On Thu, 22 Sep 94 08:30:35 PDT you said:
> On Wed., Sept. 21, Philip Graber wrote:
>>So perhaps the imperfect in Lk 23:34 (which is undoubtedly an insertion
>>in the text) simply indicates that Jesus' saying is not another event
>I would be interested in knowing what the basis of such strong confidence
>that this is an insertion is, from a text-critical view.
I cite Bruce Metzger, "A Textual Commentary on the NT" on this passage:
"The absence of these words from such early and diverse witnesses as p75 B
D* W Theta ita.d syrs copsa.bo.mss is msot impressive and can scarcely be
explained as a deliberate excision by copyists who, considering the fall of
Jerusalem to be proof that God had not forgiven the Jews, could not allow it
to appear that the prayer of Jesus had remained unanswered. At the same time
the longoin, though probably not part of the original Gospel of Luke, bears
self-evident to;kens ;of its dominical origin, and was retained, within
double square brackets, in its traditional place where it had been incorporated
by unknown copyists relatively early in the transmission of the Third Gospel."
If I rightly understand what Metzger means here, the words are (1) very likely
an original Jesus-saying (or tradition), but (2) unlikely to have been in the
earliest text of the gospel of Luke.
CARL W. CONRAD, C25001CC@WUVMD.BITNET OR C25001CC@WUVMD.WUSTL.EDU
Classics, Washington University, One Brookings Dr., St. Louis, MO 63130
Phone: (314) 935-4018