ساعرض هنا تحقيق نصى لاشهر 4 نصوص تحدث فيهم بولس الرسول عن ربنا يسوع المسيح باعتباره ” طبيعة الله ومساو له – ملء اللاهوت المتحد بالجسد – الوهيم(كرسيك يا الله ) – يهوه (يارب فى البدء اسست الارض ) -خالق الكل (فيه وبه خلق الكل) ” من اقدم مخطوطة وصلت لنا تحوى معظم رسايل القديس بولس ” بردية 46 “ بردية 46 كانت تؤرخ لبدايات القرن الثالث حسب العالم كينون لكن العالم يونج كيو كيم ارجع المخطوطة لزمن الامبرواطور دومتيان حوالى سنة (81-96) حسب المقارنة بين شكل خط المخطوط ومخطوط نفس العصر اللى استخدمها واخيرا كومفورت اعطى رائيه ان البردية تعود لمنتصف القرن الثانى لان بعض الحروف فيها غير مشابهه تماما للمخطوطات الىل استخدمها يونج فيرجح انها ترجه لمنتصف القرن الثانى عموما فالبردية اقدم بردية محفوظ فيها نص اغلب رسايل البولس ” من اواخر القرن الاول الى حوالى منتصف القرن الثانى ”
Kenyon dated this codex to the first half of the third century. Kenyon’s dating was largely influenced by the handwriting of the stichometrical notes at the end of several of the epistles, which he dated to the early part of the third century.1 Ulrich Wilcken, who was director of the Vienna library and founder of Archiv für Papyrusforschung, thought it belonged to the second century and said it could be dated safely to around a.d. 200.2 Wilcken suggested this date on the basis of seeing only one leaf. Hans Gerstinger also thought it belonged to the second century.
Young Kyu Kim proposed a date in the reign of Domitian (a.d. 81–96) based on six criteria:3
1.All literary papyri similar to the exact style of P46 have been assigned dates between the first century b.c. and the early second century a.d. His primary examples are P. Oxy. 1790, P. Oxy. 2337, P. Oxy. 3695, P. Mil. Vogl. 1181, P. Mich. 6789, P. Alex. 443, P. Med. 70.01 verso, and P. Rylands III 550. His secondary examples are P. Mon. Gr. 216, P. Berol. 6926/P. Gen. 100, P. Gr. Berol. 19c, P. Gr. Berol. 29b, P. Oxy. 8, P. Hamb. III 193, and P. Oxy. 3721.
2.Comparable ********ary papyri are dated early: P. Oxy. 211, 270, 318, 320, and 3051.
3.The handwriting of P46 is an upright, informal uncial of the early type. It is a bookhand, manifesting at times a running hand, giving way here and there to ligatures, while still trying to keep the upper line. Such a style is very rare after the first century.
4.The finals at the feet of the letters are seen in other manu******s dated from the last quarter of the third century b.c. to the third quarter of the first centurya.d.
5.The εγ-form (before compounds with β, δ, and λ) is very early, as compared with the εκ-form.
6.The hand of a certain corrector (no. 11, writing και) appears in manu******s from the second century b.c. to the early second century a.d.
My observation is that most of the manu******s from the first century that Kim sees as displaying a hand comparable to P46 show some similarities in individual letters but not in overall appearance and therefore do not belong to the same time period as P46. Kim himself admits that several of these manu******s display an early form of what we see later in P46, especially with respect to the serifs at the bottom and tops of letters.
Let us take, for example, several of the papyri dated to the first century that Kim cites as illustrating the kind of hand manifested in P46. My observation is that the following manu******s are too early to be parallel examples of P46:
P. Med. 70.01 verso (a.d. 55)—several similarities, but earlier than P46
P. Oxy. 270 (a.d. 94)—some similarities, but not many
P. Oxy. 2987 (a.d. 78–79)—nascent similarities
P. Oxy. 3051 (a.d. 89)—a few similarities
P. Oxy. 3695 (first century a.d.)—many similarities, but not completely identical
P. Gr. Berol. 6845 (ca. a.d. 100)—a few similarities
P. Berol. 6926 + P. Gen. 100 (second half of first century a.d.)—a few similarities in small serifs, but not completely identical
These manu******s may have, here and there, a few letters like P46, but their overall appearance is earlier.
Far more similarities are seen in the following manu******s:
P. Oxy. 8 (assigned late first or early second century)—very similar morphologically
P. Oxy. 841 (the second hand, which cannot be dated later than a.d. 125–150 [see plate and discussion in C. H. Roberts, Greek Literary Hands, no. 14])— the handwriting is similar to that found in P46
P. Oxy. 1622 (dated with confidence to pre–a.d. 148, probably during the reign of Hadrian [117–138], because of the ********ary text on the verso)—this early–dated specimen shares many similar features with P46
P. Oxy. 2337 (assigned to the late first century)—very similar but probably earlier than P46
P. Oxy. 3721 (assigned to the second half of the second century, but Kim would date it earlier)—the most comparable of all the manu******s I have personally seen
P. Rylands III 550 (assigned to the second century)—a remarkable likeness toP46
P. Berol. 9810 (early second century)—quite similar (see plate and discussion in Schubart, Palaeographie,Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 1.4.1 [Munich: C. H. Beck, 1925], 29b.)
Another reasonable way to date P46 (P. Chester Beatty II) is to compare it with the other manu******s with which it was discovered. The earliest manu****** in this collection is unquestionably P. Chester Beatty VI (Numbers–Deuteronomy). This manu******, displaying a good example of a Roman type of hand, is very comparable to the great Hyperides manu******, P. London 132 (early second century a.d.); the Herodas manu******, P. Egerton 1 (ca. a.d.100); and P. Oxy. 270 (a ********ary text dated a.d. 94). Thus, Beatty VI should be dated around a.d. 125.4P46 (P. Chester Beatty II) is probably not as early as Beatty VI; indeed, it seemed to Kenyon that P46 had “lost a little of the simplicity of the best of the Roman hands.”5 In the final analysis, P46 belongs to the second century and probably belongs to the middle part of that century, when we consider its undeniable comparability with P. Oxy. 1622 (ca. a.d. 117–138), P. Oxy. 3721 (second half of second century), P. Rylands III 550 (second century), P. Berol 9810 (early second century), and P. Oxy. 841 (second hand; 125–150). Thus, it is my opinion that P46 belongs to an era after a.d. 81–96 (the era posited by Kim)—perhaps the middle of the second century.
Dating P46 to this era allows time for the formation of the Pauline corpus to have occurred and for an archetypal collection to have been produced and to circulate in Egypt. Zuntz figured that an archetypal Pauline corpus was formed by a.d. 100 in Alexandria.6 Thus, an Alexandrian copy such as P46 could have been produced shortly thereafter and been used by Egyptian Christians in Alexandria and other nearby towns such as Aphroditopolis
1 Frederic G. Kenyon, The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, fasc. 3, supplement 3.1, Pauline Epistles, Text (London: Emery Walker, 1936), xiv–xv.
2 Ulrich Wilcken, Archiv für Papyrusforschung 11 (1935): 113; also cited in Günther Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum, Schweich Lectures 1946 (London: Oxford University Press for the British Academy, 1953), 11.
3 Young Kyu Kim, “Palaeographical Dating of P46 to the Later First Century,”Biblica 69 (1988): 248–57.
4 Wilcken dated Beatty VI to the reign of Hadrian (a.d. 117–138); see Archiv für Papyrusforschung 11 (1935): 113.
5 Frederic G. Kenyon, The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, fasc. 1, General Introduction (London: Emery Walker, 1933), 13–14.
Comfort, Philip Wesley ; Barrett, David P.: The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manu******s. A corrected, enlarged ed. of The complete text of the earliest New Testament manu******s. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House, 2001, S. 204
