The Gospels in the Second Century | Page 9

text. But in other cases it seems probable
that the writer had really a different text before him, because he quotes
it more than once, or another writer quotes it, with the same variation.
This however is again an uncertain criterion; for the second writer may
be copying the first, or he may be influenced by an unconscious
reminiscence of what the first had written. The early Christian writers
copied each other to an extent that we should hardly be prepared for.
Thus, for instance, there is a string of quotations in the first Epistle of
Clement of Rome (cc. xiv, xv)--Ps. xxxvii. 36-38; Is. xxix. 13; Ps. lxii.
4, lxxviii. 36, 37, xxxi, 19, xii. 3-6; and these very quotations in the
same order reappear in the Alexandrine Clement (Strom. iv. 6).
Clement of Alexandria is indeed fond of copying his Roman namesake,
and does so without acknowledgment. Tertullian and Epiphanius in like
manner drew largely from the works of Irenaeus. But this confuses
evidence that would otherwise be clear. For instance, in Eph. iv. 8 St.
Paul quotes Ps. lxviii. 19, but with a marked variation from all the
extant texts of the LXX. Thus:--
_Ps._ lxviii. 18 (19).
[Greek: Anabas eis hupsos aechmaloteusas aichmalosian, elabes
domata en anthropon.]

[Greek: Aechmaloteusen ... en anthropon] [Hebrew: alef], perhaps from
assimilation to N.T.
_Eph._ iv. 8.
[Greek: Anabas eis hupsos aechmaltoteusen aichmalosian, kai edoke
domata tois anthropois.]
[Greek: kai] om. [Hebrew: alef]'1, A C'2 D'1, &c. It. Vulg. Memph.
&c.; ins. B C'3 D'3 [Hebrew: alef]'4, &c.
Now we should naturally think that this was a very free quotation--so
free that it substitutes 'giving' for 'receiving.' A free quotation perhaps it
may be, but at any rate the very same variation is found in Justin (Dial.
39). And, strange to say, in five other passages which are quoted
variantly by St. Paul, Justin also agrees with him, [Endnote 18:1]
though cases on the other hand occur where Justin differs from St. Paul
or holds a position midway between him and the LXX (e.g. 1 Cor. i. 19
compared with Just. Dial. cc. 123, 32, 78, where will be found some
curious variations, agreement with LXX, partial agreement with LXX,
partial agreement with St. Paul). Now what are we to say to these
phenomena? Have St. Paul and Justin both a variant text of the LXX, or
is Justin quoting mediately through St. Paul? Probability indeed seems
to be on the side of the latter of these two alternatives, because in one
place (Dial. cc. 95, 96) Justin quotes the two passages Deut. xxvii. 26
and Deut. xxi. 23 consecutively, and applies them just as they are
applied in Gal. iii. 10, 13 [Endnote 18:2]. On the other hand, it is
somewhat strange that Justin nowhere refers to the Epistles of St. Paul
by name, and that the allusions to them in the genuine writings, except
for these marked resemblances in the Old Testament quotations, are
few and uncertain. The same relation is observed between the Pauline
Epistles and that of Clement of Rome. In two places at least Clement
agrees, or nearly agrees, with St. Paul, where both differ from the LXX;
in c. xiii ([Greek: ho kanchomenos en Kurio kanchastho]; compare 1
Cor. i. 31, 2 Cor. x, 16), and in c. xxxiv ([Greek: ophthalmhos ouk
eiden k.t.l.]; compare 1 Cor. ii. 9). Again, in c. xxxvi Clement has the
[Greek: puros phloga] of Heb. i. 7 for [Greek: pur phlegon] of the LXX.
The rest of the parallelisms in Clement's Epistle are for the most part
with Clement of Alexandria, who had evidently made a careful study of
his predecessor. In one place, c. liii, there is a remarkable coincidence
with Barnabas ([Greek: Mousae Mousae katabaethi to tachos k.t.l.];

compare Barn. cc. iv and xiv). In the Epistle of Barnabas itself there is
a combined quotation from Gen. xv. 6, xvii. 5, which has evidently and
certainly been affected by Rom. iv. 11. On the whole we may lean
somewhat decidedly to the hypothesis of a mutual study of each other
by the Christian writers, though the other hypothesis of the existence of
different versions (whether oral and traditional or in any shape written)
cannot be excluded. Probably both will have to be taken into account to
explain all the facts.
Another disturbing influence, which will affect especially the
quotations in the Gospels, is the possibility, perhaps even probability,
that many of these are made, not directly from either Hebrew or LXX,
but from or through Targums. This would seem to be the case
especially with the remarkable applications of prophecy in St. Matthew.
It must be admitted as possible that the Evangelist has followed some
Jewish interpretation that seemed to bear a Christian construction. The
quotation in Matt. ii.