| 2000. Vol. 8. N 3. P. 453-459; B ü llesbach C. Das Verhältnis der Acta Pauli zur Apostelgeschichte des Lukas: Darstellung und Kritik der Forschungsgeschichte//Das Ende des Paulus: Historische, theologische und literaturgeschichtliche Aspekte/Hrsg. F. W. Horn. B., 2001. S. 215-237. (BZNW; 106); H ä fner G. Die Gegner in den Pastoralbriefen und die Paulusakten//ZNW. 2001. Bd. 92. N 1. S. 64-77; Wehn B. «Blessed Are the Bodies of Those Who Are Virgins»: Reflections on the Image of Paul in the «Acts of Thecla»//JSNT. 2001. Vol. 79. P. 149-164; Zieme P. Paulus und Thekla in der türkischen Überlieferung//Apocrypha. 2002. Vol. 13. P. 53-62; Mangogna V. Annotazioni sulla lingua degli «Atti di Paolo e Tecla»//Koinonia. Napoli, 2002/2003. Vol. 26/27. P. 179-203; eadem. Commentario agli Atti di Paolo e Tecla: Composizione e trasmissione di un modello narrativo nel cristianesimo delle origini: Diss. Napoli, 2005; Kasser R., Luisier Ph. Le Papyrus Bodmer XLI en édition princeps: L " épisode d " Éphèse des «Acta Pauli» en copte et en traduction//Le Muséon. Louvain, 2004. Vol. 117. N 3/4. P. 281-384; Aageson J. W. The Pastoral Epistles and the Acts of Paul: A Multiplex Approach to Authority in Paul " s Legacy//Lexington Theol. Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 40. N 4. P. 237-248; Aus Liebe zu Paulus?: Die Akte Thekla neu aufgerollt/Hrsg. M. Ebner. Stuttg., 2005; Brennecke H. Ch. Die Anfänge einer Paulusverehrung//Biographie und Persönlichkeit des Paulus/Hrsg. E.-M. Becker, P. Pilhofer. Tüb., 2005. S. 295-305. (WUNT; 187); Johnston S., Poirier P.-H. Nouvelles citations chez Éphrem et Aphraate de la correspondance entre Paul et les Corinthiens//Apocrypha. 2005. Vol. 16. P. 137-147; Streete G. P. C. Authority and Authorship: The Acts of Paul and Thecla as a Disputed Pauline Text//Lexington Theol. Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 40. N 4. P. 265-276; Betz M. Die betörenden Worte des fremden Mannes: Zur Funktion der Paulusbeschreibung in den Theklaakten//NTS. 2007. Vol. 53. N 1. P. 130-145; Snyder G. Acts of Paul: The Formation of a Pauline Corpus. |
| VJoEl H.Delehaye, Une Vie inédite de Saint Jean l’aumônier. AnBoll 45 (1927) 5–74. [s.IX?] VJoGoth Vita des Joannes von Gothia, ed. A.Nikitskij. Zap. Imp. Odessk. Obšestva Ist. i Drevn. 13 (1883) 25–34. [s.IX] VJoseph Ioannis Diaconi Vita Josephi Hymnographi. PG 105,940–976. [s.XIII?] VJoXen Vita des Johannes Xenos, ed. N.Tomadakes, ΕΕΒΣ 46 (1983–1986) 4–8. [s.XI] VIrene J.O.Rosenqvist, The Life of St Irene abbess of Chrysobalanton. Uppsala 1986 (Index 135–169). [s.X] VisCosm Ch.Angelidi, La version longue de la Vision du moine Cosmas. AnBoll 101 (1983) 73–99. [s.X] VisDoroth Papyrus Bodmer XXIX, Vision de Dorothéos, ed. A.Hurst – O.Reverdin – J.Rudhardt. Genf 1984 (Wörterverz. 36–39). [s.IV] VisSah G.Garitte, La Vision de S.Sahak en grec. Le Muséon 71 (1958) 255–278. Viteau J.Viteau, Passions des Saints Écaterine et Pierre d’Alexandrie, Barbara et Anysia. Paris 1897. VLeoCat A.Acconcia Longo, La vita di S. Leone vescovo di Catania e gli incantesimi del mago Eliodoro. RSBN 26 (1989) 3–98. [s.IX] VLuca G.Schirò, Vita di S. Luca vescovo di Isola Capo Rizzuto. Palermo 1954 (Index 128f.). [s.XII] VLucAnt Leben u. Martyrium des Lucian von Antiochien, in: Philostorgius, Kirchengeschichte, ed. J.Bidez. Leipzig 1913 (Wortregister 309–340). [s.X] VLucia G.Rossi Taibbi, Martirio di Santa Lucia [s.IX?]. Vita di Santa Marina [s.XII?]. Palermo 1959 (Index 110–111). VLucStir D.Z.Sophianos, Οσιος Λουκς. Ο βος το Οσου Λουκ. Athen 1989. [s.X] VMacarPel Vita des Makarios von Pelekete, ed. I.van den Gheyn. AnBoll 16 (1897) 142–163. [s.IX] VMarAeg Vita Mariae Aegyptiae. PG 87,3697–3726. [s.VII] VMarcAc G.Dagron, La Vie ancienne de Saint Marcel l’Acémète. AnBoll 86 (1969) 271–321. [s.VI] VMarthae La Vie de Sainte Marthe, mère de S.Syméon Stylite le Jeune, ed. P.van den Ven, La Vie ancienne de S.Syméon Stylite le Jeune (521–592). Bruxelles 1970, II 253–314 (Index 354–358). [s.VII–IX] VMartin P.Peeters, Une Vie grecque du pape S.Martin I. AnBoll 51 (1933) 225–262. [s.VIII] VMax D.Kourilas – F.Halkin, Deux Vies de S.Maxime le Kausokalybe. AnBoll 54 (1936) 38–112. [s.XIV] |
| 399 Согласно R. М. Grant («The Description of Paul in the Acts of Paul and Thecla»,Vigiliae Christianae, xxxvi 1982., pp. 1–4), некоторые портретные черты, вероятно, заимствованы у прославленного греческого поэта Архилоха. 401 То, что Павел говорил в переносном смысле, видно из предыдущих слов: «…я каждый день умираю!» Кроме того, римского гражданина не могли отдать дикими зверями. 402 Англ. перевод рассказа о поединке Павла со львом дан в книге автора настоящей работы Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York, 1957), pp. 255–262. 403 Кодекс издан под редакцией M. Testuz, Papyrus Bodmer XXII (Cologne–Geneva, 1959). См. также A. F.J. Klijn, «The Apocryphal Correspondence between Paul and the Corinthians», Vigiliae Chrisrianae, xvii (1963), pp. 2–23. 404 Книга недавно вышла вместе с более поздними трудами IV–VI веков, относящимися к Иоанну. См. издание Eric Junot, J–D. Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, в 2–х т. (Corpus christianorum, Sйries apocryphorum, 1, 2; Turnhout, 1983). 405 См. R. H. Miller, «Liturgical Materials in the Acts of John», Stadia Patristica,xiii (Texte und Untersuchungen, cxvii; Leipzig, 1975), pp. 375–381. 406 С. Schmidt, Die alten Petrusakten im Zusammenhang mit der apokryphen Apostelliteratur untersucht (Texte und Untersuchungen, ix, I; Leipzig, 1903), pp. 77–79 и 97 и далее. 407 Helmut Koester, History and Literature of Early Christianity, ii (Philadelphia, 1982), p. 325. 409 Согласно этой широко известной легенде, слова «Domine, quo vadis?» («Господи, куда идешь?») произнес апостол Петр, когда, спасаясь бегством из Рима, он встретил Христа на Аппиевой дороге. Господь ответил: «Я пришел распяться вновь». Петр понял, что Господь должен снова пострадать в смерти своих учеников. Поэтому он вернулся в Рим, где принял мученическую кончину. 411 См. всесторонний анализ W. Schneemelcher и К. Schäferdick в New Testament Apokrypha, ii (Philadelphia, 1965), pp. 169–174. Выше процитирован заключительный вывод их работы. 412 Carl Schmidt, Gespräche Jesu mit seinem Jüngern nach der Auferstehung (Texte und Untersuchungen, xliii; Leipzig, 1919). |
| На Востоке авторитет «Пастыря» уменьшался едва ли не стремительнее, чем на Западе. Евсевий Кесарийский в нач. IV в. свидетельствует, что книга читается публично в церквах и служит для наставления катехуменов, хотя нек-рые подвергают сомнению ее богодухновенность ( Euseb. Hist. eccl. III 3. 6); но в др. месте (Ibid. 25. 4) он причисляет «Пастыря» к подложным сочинениям. Свт. Афанасий I Великий исключает «Пастыря» из канона, однако использует книгу в полемике с арианами, называя ее при этом «полезнейшей» ( Athanas. Alex. De incarn. Verbi. 3. 1//PG. 25b. Col. 101; SC. 199. P. 286), и говорит о пригодности ее для оглашаемых ( Idem. Ep. pasch. 39). В IV в. «Пастырь» еще используется (без упоминания имени автора и названия произведения) в «Макариевском корпусе». Начиная с V в. сочинение практически исчезает с горизонта визант. авторов, цитаты из «Пастыря» содержатся лишь в «Вопросоответах к дуку Антиоху», приписывавшихся свт. Афанасию Великому (V или VI в.; CPG, N 2257), и в «Пандектах» Антиоха-монаха (VII в.; CPG, N 7843). А. Ю. Виноградов, А. Г. Дунаев Изд.: Der Hirt des Hermas/Hrsg. M. Whittaker. B., 1956, 19672 (испр. и доп.). (GCS; 48); The Apostolic Fathers: A New Transl. and Comment. N. Y., 1964. Vol. 6: The Shepherd of Hermas/Ed. R. M. Grant, trad. G. F. Snyder; Le pasteur/Ed. R. Joly. P., 1958, 19682 (доп.). (SC; 53); Papyrus Bodmer XXXVIII: Erma, Il Pastore (Ia-IIIa visione)/Ed., introd., comment. A. Carlini. Genova, 1991; Die Apostolischen Väter: Griechisch-deutsche Parallelausgabe. Tüb., 1992; El Pastor de Hermas/Ed. J. J. Ayán Calvo. Madrid, 1995. (Fuentes patrísticas; 6); Papiasfragmente: Hirt des Hermas/Eingel., hrsg., übertr., erl. U. H. J. Körtner, M. Leutzsch. Darmstadt, 1998. (Schriften des Urchristentums; 3); рус. пер.: Пастырь Ерма/Пер., введ., примеч.: прот. П. Преображенский//ПМА. СПб., 18952. С. 127-247; Рига, 1994р. С. 198-285; М., 2003п. 2008р. С. 222-309; «Пастырь» Гермы/Введ., коммент.: И. С. Свенцицкая. М., 1997. Указатель: Concordantia in Patres Apostolicos. Hildesheim, 1999. Pars 5: Hermae Pastoris concordantia/Cur. Á. Urbán. (Alpha-Omega. R. A: Lexika, Indizes, Konkordanzen zur klassischen Philologie; 191). |
| Photograph 4-- Papyrus p52 of John 18:31–33 from before 150 A.D. By permission of the John Rylands University Library, Manchester. If we use the date of 135 AD, as the time when this copy was made, we see that Christians were using the Gospel according to John in Egypt, along the Nile River, within 40 to 45 years of the date of its composition. This is strong evidence that by 135 AD there must have already been hundreds of copies of this Gospel in the hands of hundreds of thousands of Christians. Therefore, if someone did wish to change either the Written Gospel or the Doctrinal Gospel , how would he go about altering the words in all these copies, and the knowledge of the words in all those minds and hearts? Papyrus Manuscripts of 200 AD The last two papyrus manuscripts which we want to discuss, are dated around 200 AD. The first one, numbered p75 is now in the Bodmer Library of World Literature at Cologny, a suburb of Geneva, Switzerland. It originally contained Luke and John on 144 pages, of which 102 pages, or about 70%, remain. It is the oldest known copy of the Gospel according to Luke, and one of the earliest copies of the Gospel according to John. Of great importance to any study of Christian doctrine is the fact that the middle of the codex with the last three chapters of Luke and the first 13 chapters of John are intact. The first chapter of John includes the preexistence of the divine «Word» which became flesh. The last three chapters of Luke include Jesus» death on the cross and three of his resurrection appearances. Photograph 5 of Luke 24:31–50 includes these three appearances – the first to two disciples on the road to Emmaus – the second to Peter – and the third to all the disciples except Thomas. Photograph 7 in Chapter I of Section Six shows a picture of John 14:16 from this same papyrus. We have already seen a picture of the second manuscript, designated p46, in Photograph 1 in Part A of this chapter. It comprises eighty-six leaves, or 75%, of a papyrus codex originally made up of 114 leaves. Presently in the Chester Beatty Museum in Dublin, Ireland, it contains ten epistles of Paul in the following order: Romans, Hebrews, I and II Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and I and II Thessalonians. As might be expected in an ancient book, part of the beginning and end are missing. However, I Corinthians, which was written in 55 AD, quoted by Clement in 96 AD, and by Polycarp in 107 AD, is almost completely preserved. |
| I make a point of the fact that 70% of the two Gospels and 75% of Paul " s letters are still present, because that represents a very important sample. If the 70 or 75% which we have of these old texts is in agreement with the complete texts from 150 years later (see below), then I think that it is valid to assume that the other 25 to 30% which is no longer present, also agreed originally. Furthermore, when considered together they represent almost 40% of the entire Gospel-New Testament. Dr. Bucaille dismisses these papyrus manuscripts with one sentence. He writes, «The older documents, the papyri of the third century, one possibly dating from the second (see p52 above), only transmit fragments to us». Surely, Dr. Bucaille, who is a medical doctor, would not say after a leg amputation that the remaining 75% of the man was only a fragment. Anyway, in my opinion, 70 percent of the Gospel according to Luke and John is more than a «fragment». It proves conclusively that the Written Gospel and the Doctrinal Gospel were the same in 200 AD as they are now. Photograph 5-- Luke 24:31–50 as preserved in Papyrus p75 from 200 A.D., including three post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. By permission of the Bodmer Library, Geneva. Other witnesses to the second century text of our present Gospels Translations Between 150 and 180 AD, translations of the New Testament were made into old Latin and Syriac, also called Aramaic. We do not have the originals of these. We have copies from the 4th and 5th centuries. Diagram 4 At first it might seem that such late copies are of little value. However, if one looks at Diagram 4 and thinks about it for a moment, it becomes clear that where a 5th century Syriac manuscript (C) agrees with a Greek papyrus (B) from 200 AD, they are 2 witnesses giving a clear testimony as to what the Greek text (A) said at the time of translation in 150 AD. Quotations from the Gospel-New Testament by Early Christian Writers To give just one example of the testimony of the early Christian writers, I will mention Tertullian. He lived from 160–220 AD and was a presbyter of the Church in Carthage in North Africa. He quotes from the New Testament more than 7000 times, of which 3,800 are from the four Gospel accounts; and his quotations show that the text which he used is essentially the same as that which we have today. Complete copies of the Gospel-New Testament from 350 AD |
| А.Г. Дунаев 1.1 Введение к гомилии «О Пасхе» До открытия Воппег " ом папируса Chester Beatty и издания его в 1940-м году из гомилии Мелитона были известны лишь незначительные фрагменты. Второй папирус, содержащий проповедь , был опубликован Testuz " ем в 1960 г. Эти два папируса позволяют в достаточной степени восстановить текст. Важную услугу при этом оказывают грузинские, коптские и сирийские переводы 1 . 1.2.1 Греческий текст A Chester Beatty/Michigan papyrus. Факсимиле . Транскрипция у Bonner " a . 4 в. В Papyrus Bodmer XIII. Транскрипция у Testuz " a . 3 – нач. 4 в. О Oxyrhyiichus papyrus 13.1600. Издан в 1919 г. , новая транскрипция Hall " а . 5 в. С 1.2.2 Коптские версии С 1 Brit. Lib. Or. MS. 9035 [Wadi Sarga 17]. Опубл. в 1922 г. , идентифицирована Воппег " ом в 1939 г. (Harv. Theol. Rev. 32, p. 141–2). Ок. 4 в. С 2 Mississipi Coptic Codex [Crosby Codex]. О существовании этой версии стало известно в 1958 г., однако опубликована рукопись с привлечением остальных коптских версий (в части, совпадающей с С 2 ) и в сопровождении английского перевода совсем недавно , 12 – 79. Впервые она стала доступна лишь в коллации с остальными вариантами в издании Hall " a (1979 г.) в сделанном им латинском переводе (по фотокопии). Учтена нами по коллации Hall’a, сверенной и исправленной по изданию в CSCO. Ок. 3 – 4 в. С 3 Oxoniensis, Bodl. Libr., Clarendon Press b. 4, fr. 45. Изд. в 1984 г. , 390–1, франц. перев. в коллации с С 4 на с. 392–3. Не позднее 11 – 12 вв. С 4 Parisiensis, Bibl. Nat., Copte 131 2 , fol. 134. Изд. в 1984 г. , 387–8, франц. перев. в коллации с С 3 на с. 392–3. Отличия от С 3 незначительные. Датируется 6 –7 вв. Обе рукописи в хорошей сохранности. С р riv Папирус 4 в. из частного собрания. Опубликован в 1984 г. , а также в статье: Funk W.P. Die Zeugen des koptischen Litera-turdialekts 17. – Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 114, 1987, 124–7 (сама статья – с. 117–33). Состояние плохое, частично перекрывается С 1 . Для установления греческого текста интереса не представляет. Ср.: Kasser P. Encore un document protolycopolitain. – Muséon 98 (fasc. 1/2), 1985, 79–82 (на с. 80–1 собрана коптская лексика фрагмента Мелитона с некоторыми орфографическими и диалектологическими уточнениями). |
| In 1961 was published a two-Gospel codex from the Bodmer collection (Papyrus Bodmer XIV – XV), given the notation P 75 , which contained the Gospels of Luke and John. P 75 is dated by experts to around 200, and so it was possibly written before the end of the second century. It encloses Luke and John in a single quire and still contains the page on which Luke ends and John begins. Some ‘subtle harmonizations’ in the text, where the scribe conforms the wording to one of the other Gospels, seem to indicate the scribe’s knowledge of Matthew (and perhaps Mark). 178 Skeat suggested that this single-quire codex was originally connected to another which contained Matthew and Mark. 179 Certainly, if copied around 200, it is more likely than not that it had such a companion volume, whether attached or separated. In 1979 C. H. Roberts concluded that the Gospel fragments given the names P 4 (a fragment of Luke), P 64 , and P 6 ? (fragments of Matthew) had been written by the same hand and belonged originally to the same codex. 180 Because P 4 could be dated to the late second century, this would make these fragments the earliest example of a multiple Gospel codex known. Some years later, Skeat decided to subject Roberts’s claim to his own scrutiny. Not only did he come to agree with Roberts, he believed he could also calculate from the fragments that in the codex from which they came Matthew was not followed immediately by Luke, but another work intervened. In other words, the codex contained at least three Gospels. And since he could not imagine the existence of a codex which contained only three Gospels, Skeat concluded, ‘we now have proof of a four-Gospel codex the ancestors of which must go back well into the second century’. 181 Skeat’s conclusions have indeed been accepted by a number of other specialists, 182 but they have not gone unchallenged. 183 The question, at the moment, remains under debate. It seems agreed, however, that the books of Matthew and Luke represented in P 4,64,67 were copied by the same scribe, whether bound to each other and to Mark and John or not. And it seems that this scribe was commissioned to copy books that would function as one church’s Scripture. Pulpit Editions |
| Secondly there is absolutely no textual evidence for such a reading. Not one copy of the Gospel of John, from the oldest Greek copy of 200 AD until now shows periclytos in place of paracletos. Photograph 7 of Papyrus p75 from 200 AD shows John 14:9 –26a. The last word on the page clearly shows «PARACLETOS» from verse 26. Verse 16 has been partly destroyed, but in the middle of the line marked by the two arrows one can still see «PARACL – N» for paracleton. («ON» signifies a direct object.) In the first case the whole word is visible and in the second, two of the three letters under discussion can be clearly seen. from Papyrus p75 from 200 A.D., showing the word «PARACLETOS» in verse 16 and in verse 26, where it is the last word on the page. By permission of the Bodmer Library. Thirdly, although periclytos, which means famous or renowned, was used by Homer when he wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey in the classical Greek of the 10th century B.C., there is not one instance where this word, or any of the other members of its word group, are used in the Koine Greek of the New Testament or the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament . Thus there is neither textual or linguistic support for «periclytos». a. Dr. Bucaillés preliminary remarks By placing his comments about the Paraclete, or Holy Spirit, at the end of his chapter on Contradictions and Improbabilities, Dr. Bucaille pushes the reader to assume that there is a contradiction or improbability even before reading the information. Next, claiming that only one author mentions this Paraclete who is to come, he asks how a matter of such «fundamental importance» could be mentioned in only one of the four Gospel accounts. This then leads to two suggestive and critical questions. 1. «Was it originally in the other accounts and then suppressed?» Suppression? Who said anything about suppression? Then without having provided even one fact of confirming evidence to prove that something was suppressed, he asks, 2. «Why was it suppressed?» |
| Is Our Copy of the Bible a Reliable Copy of the Original? Introduction Many skeptics believe that the Bible has been drastically changed over the centuries. In reality, the Bible has been translated into a number of different languages (first Latin, then English and other languages, see History of the Bible). However, the ancient manuscripts (written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) have been reliably copied over the centuries - with very few alterations. Old Testament How do we know the Bible has been kept intact for over 2,000 years of copying? Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, our earliest Hebrew copy of the Old Testament was the Masoretic text, dating around 800 A.D. The Dead Sea Scrolls date to the time of Jesus and were copied by the Qumran community, a Jewish sect living around the Dead Sea. We also have the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament dating in the second century B.C. When we compare these texts which have an 800-1000-year gap between them we are amazed that 95% of the texts are identical with only minor variations and a few discrepancies. New Testament There are tens of thousands of manuscripts from the New Testament, in part or in whole, dating from the second century A.D. to the late fifteenth century, when the printing press was invented. These manuscripts have been found in Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, and Italy, making collusion unlikely. The oldest manuscript, the John Rylands manuscript, has been dated to 125 A.D. and was found in Egypt, some distance from where the New Testament was originally composed in Asia Minor. Many early Christian papyri, discovered in 1935, have been dated to 150 A.D., and include the four gospels. The Papyrus Bodmer II, discovered in 1956, has been dated to 200 A.D., and contains 14 chapters and portions of the last seven chapters of the gospel of John. The Chester Beatty biblical papyri, discovered in 1931, has been dated to 200-250 A.D. and contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul " s Epistles, and Revelation. The number of manuscripts is extensive compared to other ancient historical writings, such as Caesar " s " Gallic Wars " (10 Greek manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), the " Annals " of Tacitus (2 manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), Livy (20 manuscripts, the earliest 350 years after the original), and Plato (7 manuscripts). |
|
|
