Foreword
Foreword
The most common associations with the name Papias held by contemporary scholars are the early patristic writer’s comments that the Gospel of Mark is based on the reminiscences of Peter and that Matthew wrote a collection of Jesus’ “logia” in a “Hebrew dialect.” In Johannine studies, Papias is often seen as the prime evidence for there being two contemporaneous “Johns” in Ephesus, the apostle and the “Elder.”
What is often not recognized is that these references to Papias’ witness are generally gleaned from one source, a single section of Eusebius’ Church History. Also to be noted is that Eusebius’ comments should not be taken uncritically. For instance, serious questions exist as to whether Eusebius misunderstood Papias’ remarks about the apostle John and erroneously concluded there were two by that name. Such issues are treated thoroughly in this book. More significantly, Shanks draws from a much more extensive base of source material on Papias than the witness of a single Father.
Papias was an important early father, a member of the generation that immediately followed and was acquainted with some of the apostolic eyewitnesses to Jesus and his teachings. He belonged to that group of writers referred to as the “Apostolic Fathers,” and he is included within the major collections of these writers. Unfortunately none of his writings have survived to the present. We do, however, have extensive references to Papias in later church fathers. These attest to a five-volume work by Papias entitled An Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord. Though we no longer have this work, we have numerous statements alluding to its contents within the writings of such fathers as Irenaeus and Jerome and many others. Eusebius claims to be quoting this work in his remarks about Mark and Matthew and the two Johns of Ephesus. These references to Papias are referred to as the Papian “fragments.”
Shanks covers all of the major issues involved in an investigation of Papias. He provides a thorough presentation of all the major editions of the Apostolic Fathers and their treatment of Papias, giving a balanced evaluation of the editors’ agreements and differences in their discussions of the early father. Relatively little is known of the life of Papias. Shanks devotes a whole chapter to the subject, providing as full a treatment as is available anywhere. The largest segment of Shanks’ research is his treatment of the fragments. He devotes a considerable number of pages to the Eusebian statement alone. Each fragment is cited in English translation, followed by a critical evaluation of its accuracy and value in the discussion of Papias’ contribution to the study of the early Christian literature.
Shanks’ work covers a wide scope of issues related to Papias and the early development of the New Testament. It deals with canonical questions, such as which books Papias was aware of and what evidence Papias provides for their authorship. Some of the Papian fragments raise text-critical issues, such as his seeming awareness of the pericope of the adulterous woman now found in manuscripts of Luke and John. Shanks covers these and many similar issues in detail. Perhaps his book’s greatest value is in bringing together all the strands of research on Papias’ life and writings into a single volume, making it an invaluable reference tool.
John Polhill
Professor of New Testament
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary