A thread on Col. 1.15-20 and P46:

I think there is solid evidence to further include P46 in our readings of Colossians 1.15-20.

Specifically, in 1.18 (NA28/UBS5) we see ὅς ἐστιν ἀρχή, πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν ([Christ] is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead...)

1/

This phrasing is present in P46, however, P46 has 2 objects included which are not included in NA28/UBS5.

(1a) in P46 the definite article is included, thus P46 reads: "ὅς ἐστιν ἡ ἀρχή." I will elaborate on the potential importance of this shortly.

2/

(2a) Where NA28/UBS5 reads, “πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν” the preposition is not included in P46. Thus, P46 reads: “πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν.” Again, elaboration of potential importance coming shortly.

3/

The preposition is included (*presumably*) in NA28/UBS5 due to its inclusion in Sinaiticus and later in Vaticanus. The preposition in Sinaiticus was not included by the original scribe, but was added by an unknown corrector above the line of text. (red dot = my own marking)

5/

Vaticanus later includes the preposition as well.

6/

So, if we read Colossians 1.18b in line with P46, we have
"ὅς ἐστιν ἡ ἀρχή, πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν..."

(1b) The inclusion of the definite article has the potential to change the reading quite a bit. Rather than, "He is the beginning, it provides a possible reading of...
7/

"He is the ruler." I find this to be quite influential due to my own reading of a subjective genitive in 1.15, and the use of the locative in 1.15-20. To me, this reading fits much better with the pericope as a whole, but many others would disagree!

8/

(2b) "πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν" - Rather than "firstborn from the dead." It allows for another subjective genitive reading, "firstborn over the dead." I find this to be influential because it removes the phrase from a context of resurrection (which to me is not yet there)...

9/

And allows for a reading of full domain/power/authority/etc. in conjunction with the previous subjective gen. in 1.15. He is the firstborn over all creation... He is the firstborn over the dead. It also flows nicely into the otherwise ostensibly random ἵνα clause.

10/

Many have attempted to make sense of the pericope by standards of meter, but to my knowledge none have been overwhelmingly successful. It is my assertion that the inclusion of P46 here makes for a better reading of the text.

11/

Many would disagree with this reading (especially in its truncated Twitter style), and that is perfectly acceptable! I just find this to be rather fascinating.

Sorry for the thread. Twitter allows me to shout the nerdy stuff that no one can stand to hear any longer. :)

End/