Previous Page: Different Copies of Luke?
How close can we get to identifying the text of Epiphanius' copy of Luke? The starting point is to establish the text of Epiphanius’ copy, and work backwards from that. Unfortunately, Epiphanius provides us with very little information regarding the text he saw in his copy of Luke. Instead, he mainly tells us the differences between what he saw in Luke and Marcion's Gospel of the Lord (Ev), and gives us almost no information regarding the text of Ev and his copy of Luke where (we assume) the two were the same. He gives us no specifics regarding Chapters 1-4 of his copy of Luke, and it is only in his 78 scholia that we see glimpses of what he saw in the rest of Luke. For example, in the twelve places where he tells us that Ev had text different to what he saw in Luke, he does give both variants. Given that Epiphanius wrote around 375 A.D., we might reasonably expect that his Bible reflected the ‘mainstream’ text of the period, and for the purposes of this analysis the text of P75 might be thought to be the best approximation. At least outside the gospels, Epiphanius' text does appear Alexandrian, being closest to that in minuscule 1739, and some scholars have concluded that Epiphanius’ text is indeed Alexandrian throughout.
Although this seems reasonable, there is nevertheless a problem: Epiphanius makes no comment regarding any Western non-interpolations in Ev. Although Ev may have contained some of these pieces of text, some definitely were not present, and, if Epiphanius’ text was similar to that in P75, we would expect him to note these as ‘falsifications’ by Marcion. However, he does not refer to any of either the authoritative or ‘possible’ Western non-interpolations (see the Textual Considerations), as discussed in relation to Ev here:
Lk 5:39 – For details see the verse-by-verse discussion of Lk 5
Lk 10:41-42 – For details see the verse-by-verse discussion of Lk 10
Lk 12:19, 21, 39 – For details see the verse-by-verse discussion of Lk 12
Lk 22:19b-20, 62 – For details see the verse-by-verse discussion of Lk 22
Lk 24:3, 6, 9, 12, 36, 40, 51-52 – For details seethe verse-by-verse discussion of Lk 24
It is conceivable that Epiphanius is strangely ‘blind’ regarding the Western non-interpolations, or somehow he managed to overlook all of these ‘omissions.’ Alternatively, and more reasonably, his copy of Luke may also have not contained these same pieces of text, which would suggest that his Luke was decidedly Western as well. Evidence that this was actually the case can by found by examination of the text that Epiphanius claimed that Marcion had omitted, where the text that he quotes (which came from his copy of Luke) shows variants the same as in the Western mss. Unfortunately, not only are the omissions reported by Epiphanius few in number, but fewer still have variants in which the Western text differs. Nevertheless, a few do exist:
Scholion 41: Epiphanius states that Marcion removed Lk 13:34-35, and quotes “Your house is left unto you desolate” as part of the falsified text. “desolate” is included in Bezae, and the Western mss in general.
Scholion 52: Epiphanius states that Marcion removed Lk 18:31-33. He quotes most of the text of these verses, but not Lk 18:32b, in which Jesus is “spitefully entreated,” (which is omitted in D, it, and several other mss) and spat on.
Scholion 72: Epiphanius states that Marcion removed “Today thou shalt be with me in paradise.” This only makes sense if Epiphanius expected to see the variant found in D: “and Jesus answering said to him - the one who rebuked - `Courage! Today thou shalt be with me in paradise,'” but instead only saw the first part.
These points establish the fact that, while Epiphanius' copy of Luke may not have been fully Western, it certainly was not fully Alexandrian either. This study agrees, finding that Epiphanius’ text supported the Alexandrian text only 41% of the time. Perhaps the best that can be said is that his text was mixed..