New Testament

Part five of the series “Hebrews 2:9 – Separated by Grace.”

Before considering Origen’s citations, however, let us review the methodological considerations relevant to the use of “patristic” citations. One of the issues associated with using patristic citations as text-critical evidence involves the notion of quotation in the ancient world. Those who seek to use patristic evidence must adequately address a host of issues in order to deem those citations useful.

χωρίς has a claim to originality based on a number of internal criteria. While it is less common than χάρις in the New Testament, it is actually more common than χάρις in Hebrews.

When we turn to internal evidence, however, the argument no longer favors χάριτι; indeed, as Bart Ehrman has argued regarding χωρίς, “there can be no doubt concerning the superiority of this poorly attested variant.” This certainty can be illustrated best if we assume the priority of one variant and then attempt to explain how it was altered or corrupted into the other.

What then is the external evidence in favor of each reading? The manuscript evidence in support of χάριτι θεοῦ is very strong. The major manuscripts that favor this reading include P⁴⁶ א A B C D 33 81 330 614 it^{ar,b, comp, d, v} vg cop^{sa, bo, fay}, as well as others.