Accepted interpolations in Paul's 'authentic' epistles

[robert j]

IIUC most scholars regard Romans 16:25-27 as probably post-Pauline.

If one includes in the definition of “Pauline” as a writing “pertaining to Paul’s doctrines” --- then this doxology qualifies.

IMO, for all its brevity, Romans 16:25-27 represent one of the very best extant statements of Paul’s theology.

But I would agree with those scholars here, at least in part. I think this doxology was not written by Paul, but rather by one of his junior partners (if written during his period of activity), or more likely later by one of those following in Paul’s footsteps placing it among the Deutero-Paulines.

The multiple locations of the doxology in various ancient manuscripts complicates the issue, as well as with much or all of chapters 15 and 16 of Romans. But I suspect that at least some scholars that question the doxology are troubled by the implications.

Translations vary among bible traditions. I think the NIV is not too bad here ---

Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from faith — to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen. (Romans 16:25-27, NIV)

The long secret mystery of Jesus Christ was recently revealed by means of the Jewish scriptures. Little room here for the revelation to have been by means of recent adventures and misadventures of a crucified Galilean sage. The scriptures serve two purposes in this passage --- the means by which the mystery is revealed and the means to bring the faith to the nations.

But notice how some bibles arrange the phrases,

Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, but now is manifested, and by the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, has been made known to all the nations, leading to obedience of faith; to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, be the glory forever. Amen. (Romans 16:25-27, NASB)

In this version, the long secret mystery of Jesus Christ was recently revealed --- end of thought. And the Jewish scriptures only serve as the means by which the mystery has been made known to the nations.

By clinging to such translations, or by claiming interpolation, scholars can brush aside the troubling implications and what I believe to be the original intent of this passage.

In Greek ---

Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου, φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν κατ’ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου Θεοῦ εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος, μόνῳ σοφῷ Θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων· ἀμήν. (Romans 16:25-27)

[DCHindley]

I suppose it depends just how far one wants to slice and dice the text into "info-bits(tm)":

Πρὸς Ῥωμαῖοι (GNT)	Romans (RSV)	Notes
16:24 *[Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν. Ἀμήν.]*	16:24 *[The grace of the our Lord Jesus Christ be with all of you. Amen.]*	16:24 (Omitted in p.46 and 61, א, A, B, C. Possible dittograph of 16:20b)
16:25a *[Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου	16:25a *[Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel
16:25b καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,	16:25b and the preaching of Jesus Christ,
16:25c κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου,	16:25c according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret for long ages
16:26a φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν	16:26a but is now manifested through the prophetic writings,
16:26b κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ	16:26b according to the command of the eternal God,
16:26c εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος,	16:26c to make known to all nations the obedience of faith
16:27a μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,	16:27a to (the) only wise God, through Jesus Christ,
16:27b *ᾧ* ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς *αἰῶνας*, ἀμήν.]*	16:27b *to whom* (be) the glory into the *ages*! Amen.]*

The brackets represent text marked in the GNT (N/A 26) as likely interpolations. I added these brackets into the RSV text as well although I do not think they are specially marked in the RSV. The asterisks (*) are marking the beginning and end of passages for which there are serious textual variants.

IMHO, the significant variants [16:24 (whole verse); 16:25a-27b; and 16:27b ("ᾧ" & "αἰῶνας")] suggest that these sections may have been "corrected" against other sections, drawing upon two (or more) conflicting themes running through all these epistles.

Finally I've bolded text that I think can be considered interpolations as defined by W. O. Walker Jr. in an earlier post. While it may not be apparent from this little segment, if you consider whole books, if one reads the text without the bolded sections, which effectively eliminates the Christological statements, the sense is actually clearer than if they are left in. The bolded portions can be read by themselves, and tell a quite different story. Very interesting stuff ...

DCH

[robert j]

I suppose it depends just how far one wants to slice and dice the text into "info-bits(tm)":

Πρὸς Ῥωμαῖοι (GNT)	Romans (RSV)	Notes
16:24 *[Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν. Ἀμήν.]*	16:24 *[The grace of the our Lord Jesus Christ be with all of you. Amen.]*	16:24 (Omitted in p.46 and 61, א, A, B, C. Possible dittograph of 16:20b)
16:25a *[Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου	16:25a *[Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel
16:25b καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,	16:25b and the preaching of Jesus Christ,
16:25c κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις σεσιγημένου,	16:25c according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret for long ages
16:26a φανερωθέντος δὲ νῦν διά τε γραφῶν προφητικῶν	16:26a but is now manifested through the prophetic writings,
16:26b κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ	16:26b according to the command of the eternal God,
16:26c εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη γνωρισθέντος,	16:26c to make known to all nations the obedience of faith
16:27a μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,	16:27a to (the) only wise God, through Jesus Christ,
16:27b *ᾧ* ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς *αἰῶνας*, ἀμήν.]*	16:27b *to whom* (be) the glory into the *ages*! Amen.]*

The brackets represent text marked in the GNT (N/A 26) as likely interpolations. I added these brackets into the RSV text as well although I do not think they are specially marked in the RSV. The asterisks (*) are marking the beginning and end of passages for which there are serious textual variants.

IMHO, the significant variants [16:24 (whole verse); 16:25a-27b; and 16:27b ("ᾧ" & "αἰῶνας")] suggest that these sections may have been "corrected" against other sections, drawing upon two (or more) conflicting themes running through all these epistles.

Finally I've bolded text that I think can be considered interpolations as defined by W. O. Walker Jr. in an earlier post. While it may not be apparent from this little segment, if you consider whole books, if one reads the text without the bolded sections, which effectively eliminates the Christological statements, the sense is actually clearer than if they are left in. The bolded portions can be read by themselves, and tell a quite different story. Very interesting stuff ...

DCH

If one chooses (IMO, properly so) to ignore the interpolations proposed by Walker in the table --- interpolations for which textual evidence does not exist (though I'm not suggesting that is a definitive test for disqualifying possible interpolations) --- 2 main problems remain with the doxology (Romans 16:25-27) ---

1. The minor textual variant in v.27 --- some MSS have “to whom” and some do not.

2. The more significant problem is that the doxology now found at the end of chapter 16 (16:25-27) is found in different locations in different ancient MSS. The passage is found in most ancient MSS either at the end of chapter 14 or at the end of chapter 16. In some MSS it is found at the end of both chapters 14 and 16. In only a very few MSS it is missing.

The MSS record of Romans is messy. IMO, the various locations of the doxology is a result of editorial manipulations with chapters 15 and 16. In The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans, by Harry Gamble Jr. (1977), Gamble writes,

“We have now canvassed all the evidence for the existence at one time of a form of Romans in fourteen chapters. The evidence is geographically widespread … and this form of the letter can be traced back with confidence at least as far as the second century … “ (p. 33)

That various scribes retained the doxology as the last 2 chapters were manipulated, even entering it twice in several MSS, demonstrates the importance given the passage.

[neilgodfrey]

Finally I've bolded text that I think can be considered interpolations as defined by W. O. Walker Jr. in an earlier post. While it may not be apparent from this little segment, if you consider whole books, if one reads the text without the bolded sections, which effectively eliminates the Christological statements, the sense is actually clearer than if they are left in. The bolded portions can be read by themselves, and tell a quite different story. Very interesting stuff ...

DCH

Isn't that the sort of thing that led them to discover E,J,D and P -- the Documentary Hypothesis?

[DCHindley]

If one chooses (IMO, properly so) to ignore the interpolations proposed by Walker in the table --- interpolations for which textual evidence does not exist (though I'm not suggesting that is a definitive test for disqualifying possible interpolations) --- 2 main problems remain with the doxology (Romans 16:25-27) ---

1. The minor textual variant in v.27 --- some MSS have “to whom” and some do not.

2. The more significant problem is that the doxology now found at the end of chapter 16 (16:25-27) is found in different locations in different ancient MSS. The passage is found in most ancient MSS either at the end of chapter 14 or at the end of chapter 16. In some MSS it is found at the end of both chapters 14 and 16. In only a very few MSS it is missing.

The MSS record of Romans is messy. IMO, the various locations of the doxology is a result of editorial manipulations with chapters 15 and 16. In The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans, by Harry Gamble Jr. (1977), Gamble writes,

“We have now canvassed all the evidence for the existence at one time of a form of Romans in fourteen chapters. The evidence is geographically widespread … and this form of the letter can be traced back with confidence at least as far as the second century … “ (p. 33)

That various scribes retained the doxology as the last 2 chapters were manipulated, even entering it twice in several MSS, demonstrates the importance given the passage.

All true. Now I was using a set of techniques, unapproved of course, that I had developed years ago, that blocked out text that seemed to interrupt lines of thinking or argumentation. From the point of the digression to when the original subject gets picked up again were bracketed. In time I realized that this was predominantly Christology. But what was left after the bracketing seemed to have a life of its own, completely different that the Christology. The Christology told its own unique story about Christ's secret rescue mission. Each set of text had its own characteristics, especially use or non use of the definite article with the words "Theos" and "Kurios".

That is what I used here, whether rightly or wrongly. But the point was that one sometimes has to look at tiny segments of text, although some are rather large blocks. Mainly the stray "in christ" or "through christ", but also changes to doxologies and such to redirect them from the traditional Judean God and towards Jesus Christ, a quasi-divine redeemer figure.

DCH

[Charles Wilson]

All true. Now I was using a set of techniques, unapproved of course, that I had developed years ago, that blocked out text that seemed to interrupt lines of thinking or argumentation. From the point of the digression to when the original subject gets picked up again were bracketed. In time I realized that this was predominantly Christology. But what was left after the bracketing seemed to have a life of its own, completely different that the Christology. The Christology told its own unique story about Christ's secret rescue mission. Each set of text had its own characteristics, especially use or non use of the definite article with the words "Theos" and "Kurios".

DCH-

Did you attempt this with Philemon? Others have and the result is not very pretty.

What say ye?

CW

[DCHindley]

All true. Now I was using a set of techniques, unapproved of course, that I had developed years ago, that blocked out text that seemed to interrupt lines of thinking or argumentation. From the point of the digression to when the original subject gets picked up again were bracketed. In time I realized that this was predominantly Christology. But what was left after the bracketing seemed to have a life of its own, completely different that the Christology. The Christology told its own unique story about Christ's secret rescue mission. Each set of text had its own characteristics, especially use or non use of the definite article with the words "Theos" and "Kurios".

DCH-

Did you attempt this with Philemon? Others have and the result is not very pretty.

What say ye?

There are no grand theological statements spliced in to this personal letter, but lots of code words spliced in, like (in the order they are encountered) 1b Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ (of/from christ Jesus), 3b Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (of/from Jesus christ), 5c τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν (the lord Jesus), 6b εἰς Χριστόν (into christ), 8b ἐν Χριστῷ (in christ), 9b Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ (of/from christ Jesus), 20d ἐν Χριστῷ (in christ), 23c ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (in Jesus christ), and 25b τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (of/from the lord Jesus christ), I suppose so we don't forget who Paul should be speaking about. Only without them, the whole letter seems so much simpler and more sincere, rather than some sort of coded theological treatise in need of deciphering.

GNT	RSV (with a couple slight changes)
1:1a Παῦλος δέσμιος	PHM 1:1a Paul, a prisoner
1b [Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ]	1b [...],
1c καὶ Τιμόθεος ὁ ἀδελφὸς	1c and Timothy our brother,
1d Φιλήμονι τῷ ἀγαπητῷ καὶ συνεργῷ ἡμῶν	1d to Philemon our beloved fellow worker
2a καὶ Ἀπφίᾳ τῇ ἀδελφῇ	2a and Apphia our sister
2b καὶ Ἀρχίππῳ τῷ συστρατιώτῃ ἡμῶν	2b and Archippus our fellow soldier,
2c καὶ τῇ κατ᾽ οἶκόν σου ἐκκλησίᾳ,	2c and the church in your house:
3a χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου	3a Grace to you and peace from God our Father even LORD
3b [Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ].	3b [...].
4a Εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου πάντοτε	4a I thank my God always
4b μνείαν σου ποιούμενος ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν μου,	4b when I remember you in my prayers,
5a ἀκούων σου τὴν ἀγάπην καὶ τὴν πίστιν,	5a because I hear of your love and of the faith
5b ἣν ἔχεις πρὸς	5b which you have toward
5c [τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν]	5c [...]
5d καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἁγίους,	5d all the saints,
6a ὅπως ἡ κοινωνία τῆς πίστεώς σου ἐνεργὴς γένηται ἐν ἐπιγνώσει παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ τοῦ ἐν ἡμῖν	6a and I pray that the sharing of your faith may promote the knowledge of all the good that is ours
6b [εἰς Χριστόν].	6b [...].
7a χαρὰν γὰρ πολλὴν ἔσχον καὶ παράκλησιν ἐπὶ τῇ ἀγάπῃ σου,	7a For I have derived much joy and comfort from your love,
7b ὅτι τὰ σπλάγχνα τῶν ἁγίων ἀναπέπαυται διὰ σοῦ,	7b because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you.
7c ἀδελφέ.	7c my brother,
8a Διὸ πολλὴν	8a Accordingly,
8b [ἐν Χριστῷ]	8b [...]
8c παρρησίαν ἔχων ἐπιτάσσειν σοι τὸ ἀνῆκον	8c though I am bold enough to command you to do what is required,
9a διὰ τὴν ἀγάπην μᾶλλον παρακαλῶ,	9a yet for love's sake I prefer to appeal to you
9b τοιοῦτος ὢν ὡς Παῦλος	9b Such as I, Paul,
9c πρεσβύτης νυνὶ δὲ καὶ δέσμιος	9c an elder and now a prisoner
9d [Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ]·	9b [...]
10a παρακαλῶ σε περὶ τοῦ ἐμοῦ τέκνου,	10a I appeal to you for my child,
10b ὃν ἐγέννησα ἐν τοῖς δεσμοῖς,	10b who I have engendered in my imprisonment.
10c Ὀνήσιμον,	10c Onesimus,
11a τόν ποτέ σοι ἄχρηστον	11a (Formerly he was useless to you,
11b νυνὶ δὲ [καὶ] σοὶ καὶ ἐμοὶ εὔχρηστον,	11b but now he is indeed useful to you and to me.)
12a ὃν ἀνέπεμψά σοι, αὐτόν,	12a I am sending him back to you,
12b τοῦτ᾽ ἔστιν τὰ ἐμὰ σπλάγχνα·	12b sending my very heart.
13a Ὃν ἐγὼ ἐβουλόμην πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν κατέχειν,	13a I would have been glad to keep him with me,
13b ἵνα ὑπὲρ σοῦ μοι διακονῇ	13b in order that he might serve me on your behalf
13c ἐν τοῖς δεσμοῖς τοῦ εὐαγγελίου,	13c during my imprisonment for the good news;
14a χωρὶς δὲ τῆς σῆς γνώμης οὐδὲν ἠθέλησα ποιῆσαι,	14a but I preferred to do nothing without your consent
14b ἵνα μὴ ὡς κατὰ ἀνάγκην τὸ ἀγαθόν σου	14b in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion
14c ᾖ ἀλλὰ κατὰ ἑκούσιον.	14c but of your own free will.
15a Τάχα γὰρ διὰ τοῦτο ἐχωρίσθη πρὸς ὥραν,	15a Perhaps this is why he was parted from you for a while,
15b ἵνα αἰώνιον αὐτὸν ἀπέχῃς,	15b that you might have him back for ever,
16a οὐκέτι ὡς δοῦλον ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ δοῦλον,	16a no longer as a slave but more than a slave,
16b ἀδελφὸν ἀγαπητόν,	16b as a beloved brother,
16c μάλιστα ἐμοί,	16c especially to me
16d πόσῳ δὲ μᾶλλον σοὶ	16d but how much more to you,
16e καὶ ἐν σαρκὶ καὶ ἐν κυρίῳ.	16e both in the flesh and in (the) LORD.
17a εἰ οὖν με ἔχεις κοινωνόν,	17a So if you consider me your partner,
17b προσλαβοῦ αὐτὸν ὡς ἐμέ.	17b receive him as you would receive me.
18a εἰ δέ τι ἠδίκησέν σε	18a If he has wronged you at all,
18b ἢ ὀφείλει,	18b or owes you anything,
18c τοῦτο ἐμοὶ ἐλλόγα.	18c charge that to my account.
19a ἐγὼ Παῦλος	19a I, Paul,
19b ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί,	19b write this with my own hand,
19c ἐγὼ ἀποτίσω·	19c I will repay it--
19d ἵνα μὴ λέγω σοι ὅτι καὶ σεαυτόν μοι προσοφείλεις.	19d to say nothing of your owing me even your own self.
20a ναὶ ἀδελφέ,	20a Yes, brother,
20b ἐγώ σου ὀναίμην ἐν κυρίῳ·	20b I want some benefit from you in (the) LORD.
20c ἀνάπαυσόν μου τὰ σπλάγχνα	20c Refresh my heart
20d [ἐν Χριστῷ].	20d [...].
21a Πεποιθὼς τῇ ὑπακοῇ σου	21a Confident of your obedience,
21b ἔγραψά σοι,	21b I write to you,
21c εἰδὼς ὅτι καὶ ὑπὲρ ἃ λέγω ποιήσεις.	21c knowing that you will do even more than I say.
22a ἅμα δὲ καὶ ἑτοίμαζέ μοι ξενίαν·	22a At the same time, prepare a guest room for me,
22b ἐλπίζω γὰρ ὅτι διὰ τῶν προσευχῶν ὑμῶν χαρισθήσομαι ὑμῖν.	22b for I am hoping through your prayers to be granted to you.
23a Ἀσπάζεταί σε Ἐπαφρᾶς	23a Epaphras sends greetings to you,
23b ὁ συναιχμάλωτός μου	23b my fellow prisoner
23c [ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ,]	23c […]
24a Μᾶρκος, Ἀρίσταρχος, Δημᾶς, Λουκᾶς,	24a [and so do] Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, [and] Luke,
24b οἱ συνεργοί μου.	24b my fellow workers.
25a Ἡ χάρις	25a The grace
25b [τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ]	25b [...]
25c μετὰ τοῦ πνεύματος ὑμῶν.	25c be with your spirit.

DCH

[Charles Wilson]

Thank you very much DCH.

At what point do "Slave" and "Prisoner" mean "Slave" and "Prisoner"? What about "I, Paul"? Is that extraneous addition?
Who is this "Onesimus" character?

Suetonius, 12 Caesars, "Galba":

"Accordingly his [[Galba's]] coming was not so welcome as it might have been, and this was apparent at the first performance in the theatre; for when the actors of an Atellan farce began the familiar lines

"Here comes Onesimus from his farm"

all the spectators at once finished the song in chorus and repeated it several times with appropriate gestures, beginning with that verse."

An "Atellan Farce" was a Lowest-Common-Denominator "Play", evidently full of Scatalogical references and very rude jokes at the expense of the elites, in this case, the new Emperor Galba.
Yes, indeed. What should "I, Paul" be talking about?
Very curious.

CW

[DCHindley]

Your question assumes a professional absence of personal apologetic interest within a field that is well known -- even self-confessedly -- made up mostly of persons with a personal interest in maintaining the overall integrity of the canonical texts and who by and large argue, in effect, that those canonical texts defy the more general trend among ancient writings to accrue interpolations.

But fwiw, Sturdy compiled a list of scholars believing Paul's letters to be interpolated, matched against specific passages.

Well, had a chance to review that list, and I am scratching my head as to the kind of study he actually conducted. For instance, he cites about 75 individual authors for Romans alone, but except for a handful (Loisy, Bultman, Schmithals, etc.), all the rest are cited just once as advocating a specific suspected interpolation. That suggests to me that he was "cherry picking" suspected interpolations to suit himself.

DCH