I. The Issue:
The question here is the beloved saying of Jesus from the
cross: “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive
them; for they know not what they do.”
The phrase appears in the traditional text, but its authenticity is
challenged in the modern critical text which encloses the phrase in double
brackets. The Introduction to the NA 28
explains that double brackets “indicate that the enclosed words , generally of
some length, are known not to be part of the original text. These texts derive from a very early stage of
the tradition, and have often played a significant role in the history of the
church (cf. Jn 7,53-8,11)” (p. 55).
II. External Evidence:
The traditional text is supported the following Greek
mss: The original hand of Sinaiticus and
its second corrector [b] (c. 7th century AD), A (using the aorist eipen for “he said” rather than the
imperfect elegen), C, third corrector
of D, K, L, N, Q, Gamma, Delta, Psi, family 1, family 13 (without the
conjunction de), 33, 565, 700, 892,
1424, 2542, Lectionary 844, and the vast majority of extant mss.
Among the versions it is found in the Vulgate and part of the
Old Latin, the Syriac (Curetonian, Peshitta, Harklean), some Bohairic Coptic mss,
and in the Latin version of Irenaeus (dated to before 395 AD).
The modern critical
text is supported by
the following Greek mss: p75, second
corrector [a] of Sinaiticus (c. 7th c. AD), B, original hand of D,
W, Theta, 070, 579, 1241.
Among the versions it is found in the 4th century
Old Latin manuscript “a”, Syriac Sinaiticus, the Sahidic Coptic, and some
Bohairic Coptic mss.
III. Internal Evidence:
Metzger notes that the absence of these words from “such
early and diverse witnesses” as those cited above “is most impressive and can
scarcely be explained as a deliberative excision by a copyist who, considering
the fall of Jerusalem to be proof that God had not forgiven the Jews, could not
allow it to appear that a prayer of Jesus had remained unanswered. At the same time, the logion though probably
not a part of the original Gospel of Luke, bears self-evident tokens 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” (Textual Commentary, p. 180).
Leon Morris, however, states:
“Early copyists may have been tempted to omit the words by reflection
that perhaps God had not forgiven the guilty nation. The events of 70 AD and afterwards may well
have looked like anything but forgiveness.
We should regard the words as genuine” (Luke, p. 327).
In favor of the originality of Luke 23:34a is its relation in
context to the words of Jesus in Luke 23:46:
“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” If original, Luke would have the first words
of Jesus on the cross be an intercessory prayer addressed to the Father for his
persecutors (v. 34) and his last words on the cross be a prayer addressed to
the Father before his death (v. 46), thus framing Luke’s discreet description
of Jesus’ suffering on the cross (vv. 34-46).
IV. Conclusion:
The external evidence for Luke 23:34a is strong. It is even supported by the original hand of
Sinaiticus, providing another example of divergence between the twin modern
critical heavyweights of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Is there a plausible explanation for why the
phrase would have been omitted?
Yes. Some scribes might have
believed the prayer of forgiveness was unheeded given the destruction of
Jerusalem in 70 AD (an event given special emphasis in Luke; cf. 19:43-44;
21:20-24). It is unclear how Metzger can
declare this as a “scarcely” tenable explanation or on what basis he concludes
it is “probably” not part of the original text of Luke. Furthermore, Metzger, like other modern
critical text advocates, acknowledges that the words of Jesus cited here obviously
have very early attestation. He even suggests
it is an authentic “dominical” saying, though not original. Given this, why not simply accept that the
23:34a is not only an early authentic saying of Jesus but an authentic saying
that was, from the beginning a part of Luke’s Gospel, demonstrating, along with
the prayer of Jesus in 23:46, his communion in prayer with the Father, even
while on the cross. In the end, I agree
with Morris: “We should regard the words
as genuine.”
JTR
No comments:
Post a Comment