I posted some excerpts of work (sans footnotes) I’ve been doing in 2 Clem; the last had do to with quotations in 2 Clem 3–4.

Here is more, picking up where the other left off, with working through quotations in 2 Clem 5–8. Unlike most treatments, I’m not overly concerned with the source of quotation or its value for establishing the text of the NT; instead I’m interested in how the author uses quoted material. How it is introduced, discussed, and the function it serves in the larger discourse of the homily (yes, I think 2 Clem is a homily/sermon).

As I mentioned in the previous post, this material is largely me just thinking as I write. I haven’t even really read/reviewed what I’ve written too carefully at all, and it and my conclusions and thoughts are all subject to change.

I will say, though, that this author (as far as I’ve examined in detail) largely uses quotations for two functions. One function is to advance the discourse, to introduce the next point in his argument. I believe (but haven’t directly considered) that he uses allusions — to either canonical material, noncanonical material, or simple available common wisdom — as well. The other function of quotations is explanatory, to work out the details of the point he has just made. We’ll see what else happens as I progress.

2Cl 5.2–4

2 For the Lord said, “You will be like sheep among wolves.” 3 And answering, Peter said to him, “But if the wolves tear apart the sheep?” 4 Jesus said to Peter, “The sheep have no fear of the wolves after they are dead, and you have no fear of those who kill you and who are able to do nothing more to you, but you fear him who after you are dead has power to throw soul and body into the hell of fire.”

This section (§5.1) begins with ουν, again indicating development and continuity. The author is extending his point and beginning to consider objections to his position on confession consisting of both word and deed. The author exhorts his hearers to true confession, “brothers, leaving behind the temporary residence of this world, let us do the will of him who called us and let us not be afraid to go out from this world.”

From this exhortation, γαρ is used to connect the clause with the quotation. As Runge describes, when γαρ is used, “the information introduced does not advance the discourse but adds background information that strengthens or supports what precedes.” The author uses this quotation to support his exhortation. Using the response of Peter, he confirms the fears of his hearers, that struggle and persecution may come, but using the counter-response of Jesus, he exhorts his hearers to shift the dimension of their fear, to fear the eternal instead of the physical and temporal.

Following the quotation, a clause beginning with και and repeating the vocative address “brothers” continues the explanation, contrasting the current sojourn “in this world” with the promise of the sojourn in the coming world (§5.5), the “rest (as in sabbath rest) of the coming kingdom and life eternal.”

This is followed by ουν, indicating development and continuity. While a new development, it is dependent on the preceding material with reference to obtaining “them” (rest and eternal life). The author concludes, again, that conduct—confessing Christ with not only words, but also actions—is the way to obtain these things. He then expands this with a new thought based on the quotation of the discussion between Jesus and Peter. Confessing Christ with word and deed involves a separation from “these worldly things,” likely meaning the things of the present life.

A new clause (§5.7), using γαρ, explains the problem with desiring “these worldly things.” The author says, “For when we desire to acquire these things, we fall away from the way of the righteous.” Again, this supports and strengthens what precedes, that properly confessing Christ with word and deed involves separation from worldly things. The issue, as the following quotation will make clear, is conflict between the things of this world and the eternal things of Christ.

2Cl 6.1–2

6.1 And the Lord said, “No slave is able to serve two masters.” If we desire to serve both God and money, it is harmful to us. 2 “For what is the advantage if someone gains the whole world but forfeits his soul?”

This clause is introduced with δε, indicating new development. However, it follows offline explanatory material (§5.7) which means (without other cues) the offline material is being developed. Here the author uses authoritative material to explain his assertion that separation from worldly things is necessary for proper confession of Christ in word and deed. He appeals first to Mt 6.24||Lk 16.13, explaining it directly after: A desire to serve both God and money will end in harm. He then explains the harm, appealing to Mk 8.36||Mt 16.26||Lk 9.25, putting a premium on the soul at the expense of gaining the whole world. Both quotations develop the thought begun in §5.7 and begin to establish the “way of the righteous,” which is confessing Christ in actions.

From here, §6.3–7 use a series of near-far demonstratives to contrast the things of the present life with the things of Christ. The incompatibility of the two ages is made evident, and the impossibility of attaining the age to come without Christ is made plain.

2Cl 6.8

And the scripture also says in Ezekiel that “if Noah and Job and Daniel should rise up, they will not rescue their children” in the captivity.

This clause again begins with δε, marking further development of the offline theme. This appeal is a summary of Ezk 14.14–20, calling out luminaries of the Old Testament—Noah, Job, and Daniel—and noting that even if they would “rise up” they would not be able to save anyone from this age. This is made plain in §6.9, which also commences with δε: “But if even righteous men such as these are not able to rescue their children by their own righteousness, if we do not keep our baptism pure and undefiled, with what kind of confidence will we enter into the kingdom of God? Or who will be our advocate if we may not be found to have holy and righteous works?”

From here, §7 begins with ωστε ουν plus a vocative; a clear return to the mainline. The author has sufficiently handled his point that confession of Christ is to be both with word and deed. One cannot serve the interests of this age; this would be the opposite of confessing Christ in actions. Further, this is necessary because one cannot save oneself, and none but Christ are righteous to save others.

The author’s next point begins with no direct quotation, instead he uses athletic imagery, similar to images used by Paul (1Co 9.24–27; Php 3.12–14; 2Ti 4.7–8). The athletic contest is used as a metaphor for pursuing Christ by confessing him in both word and deed. As the athletic contest is difficult, requires training, and has a reward; so too the life lived in confession of Christ is difficult, requires effort, and has an eternal reward.

2Cl 7.6

6 For those who have not kept the seal he says, “Their worm will not die and their fire will not be extinguished and they will be a vision to all flesh.”

Contests, however, sometimes have participants that take shortcuts in the pursuit of glory. In §7.4, notably an asyndetic clause, the participant in the heavenly contest is warned against cheating. Cheaters are ultimately discredited; the same will happen, with eternal consequence, to the one who takes shortcuts in the Christian life.

The words of Isaiah (66.24; see also Mk 9.48) are appealed to as a warning against cheating, against those who claim to confess Christ but whose actions argue against that claim. The clause introducing the quotation uses γαρ as its connective, denoting the explanatory nature of the quotation. It also directs the quotation to a particular group, those who have not kept “the seal.” They will be cursed, and will live in torment.

2Cl 8.5

5 For the Lord says in the gospel, “If you did not guard the small things, who will give you the big things? For I say to you that whoever is faithful with the least important is also faithful with the very important.” 6 Therefore he means this: keep the flesh pure and the seal unstained, in order that we may receive eternal life.

§8 begins with ουν, indicating development and continuity as the author progresses his argument. Building on the quotation of Isaiah 66.24 in §7.6, he now introduces his next major emphasis: repentance. The quotation of Isaiah finalized the picture of lack of repentance, the one who confesses Christ with lips alone, and not with deeds. The conclusion is to repent while repentance is possible.

§8.2 uses γαρ to indicate an explanation of the call to repentance. The familiar notion of clay formed by a craftsman (cf. Jer 18.4–6; Ro 9.21) is used to explain the urgency of the call. While upon the earth (§8.1) repentance is possible, much like clay is still malleable (§8.2). However, upon departure from this world (§8.3), much like clay in a kiln hardens and is no longer able to be formed, repentance becomes impossible.

From here (§8.4) the author uses ωστε to introduce the result of repentance, which is eternal life. This result is strengthened and explained with use of γαρ and appeal to what “the Lord says in the gospel.” Material similar to Lk 16.12 and 10 is quoted, though the application of the material is different than that of Luke’s gospel. Here the author of Second Clement uses “least important” and “very important” to refer to the things of this world and the things of heaven, which is eternal life. Thus the quotation is used to exalt the things of heaven as the “very important” and the hearer is encouraged to be faithful with the things of this earth, the “least important.” By repenting now, on this earth, faithfulness with the least important is shown, and the opportunity for eternal life is given. The interpretation of §8.6 verifies this, further exhorting the hearer to repentance with the consequence of eternal life.

I’ve been doing a lot of reading in 2 Clement, and have begun to work through the explicit quotations in 2 Clem (that is, those introduced with quotation formula, plus the obvious quotation in §2.1).

This is in preparation for the paper I submitted for consideration to ETS. Whether they take it or not, I plan on writing the paper. Maybe I’ll submit it for publication somewhere.

Anyway, the research is on discourse cues and authoritative sayings in 2 Clement.

I thought I’d post some of the background stuff I’m doing. I think when I write, and I need to examine all of these quotations, so I’m simply working through them. The below is rough, wrong in places, misleading in others, I’m sure. But, here it is, in case someone is interested.

I will say — it is interesting to see how the author’s argument is built and developed with each quotation, like stepping-stones along a path. It will be interesting to see how long that trend continues as I work through the balance of the quotations in the document.

2Cl 3.2

2 And he himself also says, “The one who confesses me before people, I will confess him before my Father.”

The first verse of this section is an application from the previous quotations, beginning with ουν (“Therefore”). Affirming the great mercy that has been shown through Christ’s saving of sinners, the author moves from discussing what Christ has done to discussing the response to Christ’s saving action. His statement is that those who know God must confess him and not deny him.

After the statement of the necessity of confession, the next clause begins with δε, a conjunction that functions at the discourse level to note a new development along the same theme. Here, the author uses a quotation from “he himself” (Christ) to buttress the assertion that confession of Christ is the necessary response to his saving action.

After this quotation, the author affirms his conclusion again, noting the reward of confessing Christ who saves.

2Cl 3.5

And he also says in Isaiah, “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far away from me.”

§3.4 indicates a new development along the same theme by using δε. The author has introduced the necessity of confessing and now must instruct the hearer in how to confess. One confesses, says the author, by doing what Christ says, and also by not disobeying. These are two sides to the same coin, the result emphasized by repetition in the negative. This is extended and emphasized further by possible allusion to Mk 12.30, which is itself based on De 6.4–5, the shema.

The necessity of this method of confession is then supported further, again with δε denoting development of the theme and then appeal to an authority. Here “he” is ambiguous; in context in Isaiah the “he” is God, yet here it could easily be Christ. This quotation, given the larger context of the discourse, supports and extends the current point in the author’s argument: Confession must be with both mouth and heart in order to be genuine.

2Cl 4.2

2 For he says, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord!’ will be saved, but the one who practices righteousness.”

§4 begins immediately after the quotation in §3.5 with an οὖν. Runge argues that οὖν is a marker of continuity and development. That is, like δε it marks development along the mainline, but whereas δε largely denotes new development, ουν implies a tighter continuity. Runge explains:

In the NT Epistles, [οὖν] is regularly translated as “therefore” to indicate that what follows the particle is either inferentially drawn or concluded from what precedes, hence + continuity. One often finds οὖν at high-level boundaries in the discourse, where the next major topic is drawn from and builds upon what precedes. In this way, it signals + development.

In 2Cl 4.1, the author uses οὖν as Runge describes, to move to a new major topic that is built upon the previous topic, that true confession is done with both mouth and heart. From here, he uses a γαρ to introduce a quotation that is somewhat like material found in Mt 7.21||Lk 6.46, but different enough that many consider it to be from an apocryphal source. This indicates support of what precedes, thus the author now supports his view of true confession with this quotation. The structure of the quotation itself, using αλλα, places the focus upon “the one who practices righteousness” as the one who will be saved.

This is immediately followed by a combination of conjunctions, ὥστε οὖν. As before, οὖν marks development and continuity along the theme line; so here the author continues to develop his point. The conjunction ὥστε is inferential, occurring with a subjunctive, indicating something similar to a command. This is the application necessary to meet the author’s stipulation of proper confession, to “confess him with our deeds by loving one another.” This is then negatively restated through a prepositional phrase adverbially modifying “let us confess.” The same point is then again positively stated, via αλλα, functioning to highlight the proscription to be self-controlled, merciful, and good. This is expanded (via και, which functions additively) to include suffering together and also not loving money. These deeds/works are the basis of confession of Jesus, and those who do opposite, despite whatever their mouths may confess, do not confess him.<?p>

2Cl 4.5

5 Because of this, you who do these things, the Lord said, “If you have gathered with me in my bosom and you do not do my commandments, I will throw you out and I will say to you, ‘Leave me! I do not know where you are from, you doers of iniquity!’”

The author shifts into another quotation, this time using sentence-commencing δια τουτο, “because of this.” Runge notes it functions similarly to ουν, with +continuity and +development, but has an even narrower semantic constraint. It refers back to the previous conclusion, that confession is verified by action and not simply words, but refers it to those “who do these things,” things that are warned against in §4.3. And again, it continues development of the main line as the author continues to explore and exhort the crowd about the necessity of good works as basis of one’s confession of Christ. The material quoted has similarities with Mt 7.23; 25.12; Lk 13.27 and Ps 6.8, though some consider the material to come from the Gospel of the Nazareans. Here, the author uses it to (again) seal his point. He is directly addressing those who do not confess Christ with their actions by warning them that “the Lord” (which in Second Clement could be either Jesus or God, though the author typically sees no distinction between the two) will throw them out, even if they have “gathered with [him] in [his] bosom,” if they do not do his commandments. The ones who confess with lips but not with actions are equated with “doers of iniquity” and duly separated from the Lord.

This is harsh. Rather than use his own words and authority, the author uses a saying from an authoritative figure to effectively judge his listeners.

 

In early March 2013, a project I’ve been working on for awhile will see the light of day. It is a two-volume effort, providing Greek and English texts of Apocryphal Gospels as well as other Fragments and Agrapha.

• Brannan, Rick. (ed.). Greek Apocryphal Gospels, Fragments, and Agrapha: Introductions and Translations. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2013.
• Brannan, Rick. (ed.). Greek Apocryphal Gospels, Fragments, and Agrapha: Texts and Transcriptions. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2013.

I’m especially excited for this one because most of my work thus far has been translation-based without any real writing to speak of. The Introductions and Translations volume, however, is my first effort beyond article/essay length to be published. I enjoyed the research and the writing, and hope to have further opportunities to do more writing in the future.

I was happy to be able to make some pre-release copies available for selected folks to review. Several of those who reviewed the book have written blog posts with their immediate impressions of the books. The reviews have been very positive, and I’m happy to share all that have been posted to date with you. Below are some snippets from each review, with a link to full review on each reviewer’s web site.

Thanks to William Varner, Jim West, Joel Watts, James McGrath, and Michael Bird for your thoughts!

A final note before the blurbs: Greek Apocryphal Gospels, Fragments, and Agrapha are a pre-pub right now. That means if you subscribe now, you get the books cheaper. It’s $39.95 right now, will be $49.95 after the pre-pub ships. We plan on closing the pre-pub and shipping resources to subscribers in early March 2013 (March 7 is the scheduled day). So if this stuff interests you, or if you want to learn more about these early works, then subscribe now and save $10. Thanks!

This work is a very valuable contribution that goes beyond previous lists of sayings and publications of only the English gospels. Rick’s brief but insightful comments about each of the sayings, variants, and gospels round out his work in a way that makes it accessible to both lay readers and scholars.
— William Varner, professor of Bible and Greek, The Master’s College (full review)

Rick Brannan has taken the concept so brilliantly executed by Jeremias and improved it. High praise indeed I realize but completely justifiable—for in the soon to be released Logos edition titled Greek Apocryphal Gospels, Fragments, and Agrapha, Brannan offers the Greek texts of the ‘sayings of Jesus’ which are found outside the Gospels (in the letters of Paul and other New Testament texts along with extracanonical early Christian literature) along with introductions and translations. He also provides the more important ‘gospels’ which didn’t make the canonical cut, again in both the original Greek editions and in translation.
—Jim West, adjunct professor of biblical studies, Quartz Hill School of Theology (full review)

In his latest contribution to the study of early Christian literature, Greek Apocryphal Gospels, Fragments and Agrapha, Rick Brannan places pseudepigraphal gospels, agrapha, and fragments in their due place, allowing the scholar quick access to a world that could reshape some of our understanding of early Christian theological and literary development.
—Joel L. Watts, author, Mimetic Criticism and the Gospel of Mark: An Introduction and Commentary (full review)

The Apocryphal Gospels are significant for what they tell us about the Gospel tradition and Christian origins. These two books on Apocryphal Gospels by Rick Brannan are a great pair of resources for anyone who wants immediate access to reliable texts, translations, and introductions on their PC or tablet of non-canonical Jesus literature.
— Michael F. Bird, Lecturer in Theology and New Testament at Crossway College in Brisbane, Australia (full review)

Rick Brannan’s edition of the Greek Apocryphal Gospels, Fragments, and Agrapha for Logos offers an important new resource that anyone interested in the early history of Christianity will want to have. … I expect this exciting resource will play an important role not only in providing more convenient access for scholars and students already in the habit of studying these texts, but in introducing a wider audience to them as well. Many thanks to Rick Brannan and Logos for their role in not merely providing a useful tool for the already-interested, but also helping to highlight these important texts and make them accessible to others who might not otherwise encounter them or realize their importance for our understanding of the ancient church!
— James F. McGrath, Clarence L. Goodwin Chair in New Testament Language & Literature, Butler University (full review)

I’m very encouraged that each of these reviewers picked up on my desire to not just provide editions of these valuable texts, but to do it in a way that could introduce them to folks unfamiliar with early Christian texts outside of the New Testament. If you’d like to learn more about these texts, then consider the editions from Logos. Thanks!

With many thanks to Baker Academic (Twitter: @BakerAcademic) for providing the review copy.

Title: Reading the Apostolic Fathers: A Student’s Introduction (Second Edition)
Author: Clayton N. Jefford
Publisher: Baker Academic
Date: 2012
Pages: xxviii, 196 (with Glossary and Index of Ancient Literature)

This second edition of Jefford’s Reading the Apostolic Fathers (amazon.com) is a worthy successor to the first edition (published by Hendrickson Publishers in 1995).

When one initially starts to read about the Apostolic Fathers, one invariably turns to the text itself. But there are so many questions: Who are these guys? Why did they write? Where did they come from? When did they live? How was their stuff received? Is there anything really weird or wacky in there, or are these guy OK?

The documents themselves are great, but what the new reader of the Apostolic Fathers material really needs is someone to paint the landscape. To ask and answer the questions that someone used to thinking about the New Testament would ask.

Jefford provides that in this book. Almost literally.

The format is unique, and I think it works well for the target audience and the material. Jefford has one chapter for each of the major portions of the conglomeration of material we call “Apostolic Fathers”:

• Letter of Barnabas
• Didache
• Letters of Ignatius
• Fragments of Papias
• Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians
• Martyrdom of Polycarp
• First Letter of Clement
• Second Letter of Clement (aka “An Ancient Homily”)
• The Shepherd of Hermas
• The Letter to Diognetus

Each of these sections is ordered in an Answer-and-Question format. The very first section of each portion gives the “Answers”. These correspond to section titles throughout the portion, which are “Questions”. The text of the section then answers the question. For example, here are the “Answers” for Second Clement (chapter 8, p. 123):

• 8.1.1 Manuscript Tradition—one complete Greek text; one partial Greek text (1.1–12.5); one Syriac text
• 8.1.2 Literary form—early Christian homily or sermon (mistakenly called a letter by tradition)
• 8.1.3 Authorship—unknown Christian (Clement of Rome by tradition, though unlikely)
• 8.1.4 Date—AD 98–174 (probably AD 120–140)
• 8.1.5 Setting—unknown (probably Corinth, Alexandria, or Rome)
• 8.1.6 Purpose—to support Christian unity against false teachings (perhaps delivered at a service of baptism)
• 8.1.7 Primary elements—Christology; obedience of the believer; concern for end times
• 8.1.8 Special images—knowledge of God; immortal contest; potter’s clay; neither male nor female; preexistent church
• 8.1.9 Relationship to scripture—focus on Isaiah; special emphasis on New Testament Gospels and writings of Paul

In this way the high points and relevant information of the entire book are summarized. After this come the questions. In 2 Clement’s case, they are all with sections titles of 8.2.X, corresponding to these answers. The question for 8.2.1 is “Where did we get our text?” and the discussion goes on for over a page.

In the midst of the discussion, there are several boldface words. This indicates a word that is found in the glossary in the back of the book. In the page on 2 Clement textual source, items such as Codex Alexandrinus, Clement of Alexandria, and Pseudo-Clementines appear. These are all defined, a sentence or two per entry, in the glossary in the back of the book. This, particularly for an introduction, is a nice touch.

After the answers (8.1) and questions (8.2) are the contents (8.3) which consists of an “Outline of the Materials” and a short “Summary of the Argument” which is a few paragraphs. Following this is 8.4, “Related Literature", which is a bibliography, helpfully listing non-English materials in a separate section.

Each major portion has a similar four-part structure. This structure throughout the book allows the reader to get a quick overview of the material (the “answer” section), more in-depth discussion on any particular area of interest (the “question” section) as well as a quick summary of the material.

Jefford’s treatment of the material is even-handed. He mentions the possibilities and does well to not let slip where his own affinities lie. All in all, particularly for someone who knows little to nothing about the Apostolic Fathers, this is an excellent introduction that will serve the reader well—both as an introduction, and also as a quick reference after it is read.

Final note: This is a second edition. There was one major update (addition of chapter on Papias) and some minor items I noticed, discussed in more detail here: Updates to Jefford’s “Reading the Apostolic Fathers”

As I’ve poked my way through the 2nd edition of Clayton Jefford’s Reading the Apostolic Fathers: A Student’s Introduction (amazon.com), I’ve compared some things to the 1st edition.

As I said in an earlier post, the major difference in the 2nd edition is the inclusion of a chapter on the Fragments of Papias. This is awesome, and fills a small hole left by the earlier edition.

However, I noticed another change, this one smaller. In the chapter on First Clement, there has been a change in the range of dates given for Clement’s writing. In the 1st edition (ch. 6, p. 98), you’ll see:

Date—AD 81–110 (probably 81–96, reign of the emperor Domitian)

In the 2nd edition, however (ch. 7, p. 103) you’ll see:

Date—AD 65–110  (probably reign of Emperor Domitian, AD 81–96; possibly end of reign of Emperor Nero, AD 54–68)

The text describing the various possibilities of dating hasn’t changed much. My guess is that Jefford has been influenced by Fr. Thomas Herron’s book, Clement and the Early Church of Rome. And, reviewing my copy of that book, I remember the note from its preface that Jefford utilized Herron’s basic argument in a 2006 book on The Apostolic Fathers and the New Testament (amazon.com) (pp 18–19). So it is no surprise that Jefford extends his window for Clement’s authorship. [Note: I interacted with some of Herron’s arguments earlier on this blog.]

This is probably the largest of the slight changes I’ve run across. There are some indicative of a copyedit, perhaps conforming to Baker Academic house style (I noticed a “that” changed to a “which”, or something like that). There were some other phrasing changes, but no other deep changes in content that I noticed.

So, I’ll say it again: If I was teaching an “Introduction to the Apostolic Fathers” class, I would use this book. If you have the first edition, I don’t think you need to run out and get the second edition. But if you’re looking for an introduction to the Apostolic Fathers actually written to an audience that knows little to nothing about the Apostolic Fathers, then Jefford’s book is your best bet.

(Thanks again to Baker Academic for the review copy)

Thanks to the fine folks at Baker Academic (Twitter: @BakerAcademic), who sent along a review copy of Clayton N. Jefford’s Reading the Apostolic Fathers: A Student’s Introduction (Second Edition). You can learn a little more about the book at Baker Academic’s web site. The page lists some endorsements, so it is worth checking out.

As the title notes, this is a second edition. The first edition was published by Hendrickson Publishers in 1995. I examined it over the course of a few posts on this blog (here and here). Here’s the blurb for the 2nd edition from Baker Academic’s web site:

The Apostolic Fathers are critically important texts for studying the first century of Christian history. Here a leading expert on the Apostolic Fathers offers an accessible, up-to-date introduction and companion to these diverse and fascinating materials. This work is easy to use and affordable yet offers a thorough overview for students and others approaching these writings for the first time. It explains the context and significance of each document and points to further reading. This new edition of a well-received text has been updated throughout and includes a new chapter on the fragments of Papias.

I’ve gone on record in the past that if I were able to teach an intro class to the Apostolic Fathers, I’d use Jefford’s book. It targets the reader as one unfamiliar with the material, and does well to hit it.

This is true of the second edition as well. There have been some changes, but nothing too major. The largest (and very welcome) change is the addition of a chapter on the Fragments of Papias. There are some other changes I’ve noticed as well, I will go over those in a future post.

What material does the book cover? Here’s the table of contents, which gives you an idea:

Preface to the Second Edition
For the Reader
Introduction: What Are the Apostolic Fathers?

1. The Letter of Barnabas
2. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (The Didache)
3. The Letters of Ignatius
4. The Fragments of Papias
5. The Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians
6. The Martyrdom of Polycarp
7. The First Letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (1 Clement)
8. The Second Letter of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (2 Clement)
9. The Shepherd of Hermas
10. The Letter to Diognetus

Glossary
Index

In an earlier post on the NA28, I mentioned that I wanted to do a post on orthographic variation in NA28.

I might be weird, but when reading the front matter (p. 51*), I noticed the following change to the text in 1 Peter:

• 1Pe 2.25, αλλʼ (ECM/NA28) <= αλλα (NA27).

I hadn’t noticed this change mentioned elsewhere, and I knew (based on lots of previous, boring, pedantic, obsessive-compulsive examination of all the αλλα in the NA27) that there were other spots outside of the Catholic Epistles where I’d noted an αλλα that, following most rules of orthography, should probably be αλλʼ instead.

So I thought I’d peek at the book of Mark, examining orthography between NA27 and NA28. What I found was interesting. Note I’m lazy, so I’m not typing accents/breathing marks.

• Mk 1.27: NA27 πνευμασι => NA28 πνευμασιν
• Mk 1.44: NA27 αλλα => NA28 αλλʼ
• Mk 2.4: NA27 χαλωσι => NA28 χαλωσιν
• Mk 2.17: NA27 αλλα => NA28 αλλʼ
• Mk 2.22: NA27 αλλα => ΝΑ28 αλλʼ

After chapter 2, I got bored, so I didn’t check much further. My guess is that most changes are from αλλα to αλλʼ. I have not reviewed punctuation carefully, I was focused on a quick scan of words. But it is clear that the INTF paid a lot of attention to the upper-text as well as the apparatus. The text, even outside of the Catholic Epistles, has been extensively reviewed (as the front matter indicates) and the product is better, I think. Thanks and Kudos to them for this work — unmentioned and by most likely unnoticed — that improves the product.

For the record: I don’t think orthographic changes are actually changes to the text (which is why I was surprised the difference in 1Pe 2.25 was listed on p 51*). The text is no different, the units of meaning are the same, and it communicates the same thing. The words parse/decline the same. I just find this stuff interesting.

Anyone else find any other “undocumented” (at least in the front matter) variations?