From: Ben Crick (ben.crick@argonet.co.uk)
Date: Fri Jul 04 1997 - 21:45:17 EDT
On Fri 4 Jul 97 (10:04:42 +0930), anku@celsiustech.com.au wrote:
> Metzger, in his textual commentary states that the variant should be
> discounted because even though it is supported by B it is also
> supported by D and G, which weakens the authority of B. Now I checked
> Metzger's Text of the NT where he describes D as western witness
> containing the Gospels and Acts and G as a Byzantine witness containing
> the gospels - no mention of Romans anywhere!
Hullo Andrew,
I think you'll find that "D" in the Epistles is Codex Claramontanus (Paris,
sixth century), containing the Pauline epistles; not C Bezae which is Gospels and Acts only.
"G" is a ninth-century MSS in Dresden (v Dobschuetz 012; v Soden a1028),
containing the Pauline epistles.
FWIW the King James opted for DIA TO ENOIKOUN (Byzantine text). The
Revised Version of 1881 relegated that to the margin, and opted for
TOU ENOIKOUNTOS AUTOU PNEUMATOS. It is well known that Westcott and Hort
frequently preferred the "difficult" reading, on the grounds that that would
be the more likely to have been "improved" by an editor; therefore the
more likely to have been the original. IMHO this is rather a subjective
approach to the problem. I think Fee has got it right.
Charles Hodge, /Romans/, new edition, Edinburgh, 1864, pp 260f has an
interesting comment antedating W&H:
"For the reading DIA TO ENOIKOUN AUTOU PNEUMA, Wetstein quotes the MSS D.E.
F.G. and many of the more modern MSS., together with the Syriac and Latin
versions, and several of the Fathers. This reading is adopted by Erasmus,
Stephens, Mill, Bengel, Griesbach, and Knapp. For the reading DIA TOU
ENOIKOUNTOS, ktl, are quoted the MSS A. 10. 22. 34. 38. 39., the editions
of Colinaeus, Beza, the Complutensian, and many of the Fathers. Lachmann
and Tischendorf retain the common text.
"This passage is of interest, as the reading ENOIKOUNTOS was strenuously
insisted upon in the Macedonian Controversy respecting the personality of
the Holy Ghost. The orthodox Fathers contended, that as the genitive was
found in the most ancient copies of the Scriptures then extant, ir should
be retained. If the dead are raised by the Holy Ghost, then the Holy Ghost
is of the same essence with the Father and the Son, to whom, elsewhere, the
resurrection of the dead is referred. This argument is valid, and, other
things being equal, is a good reason for retaining the common text.
"The sense, however, is in either case substantially the same. According
to the former, the meaning is, that the resurrection of believers will be
effected by the power of the Spirit of God; and according to the latter,
that the indwelling of the Spirit is the ground or reason why the bodies of
believers should not be left in the grave.
"The internal evidence is decidedly in favour of the former reading:
1. Because Paul uses precisely these words elsewhere, 'By the Holy Spirit,'
&c., 2 Tim i. 14, &c.
2. Because throughout the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, what God
does in nature or grace, he is said to do by his Spirit. Passages are too
numerous and too familiar to be cited.
3. Because the Jews seem to have referred the Resurrection of the body
especially to the Holy Ghost*. [see footnote]
"As the external authorities are nearly equally divided, the case must be
considered doubtful. If the latter reading be adopted, this clause would then answer to the phrase, /on account of righteousness/, in the preceding verse.
'On account of the indwelling of the Spirit,' expressing the same general idea under another form. Our souls shall live in happiness and glory, because they are the temples of the Holy Ghost. In the widest sense then it is true, that
to be in the Spirit, is to be secure of life and peace.
"It will be remarked, that in this verse, and elsewhere, God is said to have
raised up Christ from the dead, whereas, in John x. 17-18 the Saviour claims
for himself the power of resuming his life. So here (according to the common
resding) we are said to be raised up by the Holy Spirit; in John vi.40, Christ says of the believer, '_I_ will raise him up at the last day'; and in 2 Cor
iv.14, and in many other places, the resurrection of believers is ascribed
to God. These passages belong to that nuymerous class of texts, in which the
same work is attributed to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and
which, in connection with other sources of proof, show consclusively that
'these three are one;' and that the persons of the Adorable Trinity concur
in all works /ad extra/."
[original footnote] * Wetstein quotes such passages as the following, from the Jewish writers: 'Spiritus Sanctus est causa resurrectionis mortuorum,' &c."
Charles Hodge DD (1797-1878) was Professor in the Theological Seminary at
Princeton NJ until 1878. He was succeeeded in 1887 by one BB Warfield.
HTH.
-- Ben Crick <ben.crick@argonet.co.uk> Bible List Staff ZFC S Teacher/Pastor Director #2 of Ambiance and also on WebSite http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/crick.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:21 EDT