Matthew's Parable of the Two Sons: Textual Confusion in the Manuscript Tradition

Abstract

The parable of the Two Sons (Matthew 21:28-32) is found in three distinct versions in three of the early significant uncial manuscripts: Codex Sinaiticus (01, א), Codex Vaticanus (03, B), and Codex Bezae (05, D). While Vaticanus and Sinaiticus reverse what each son says and does, they nonetheless conclude the pericope with the approved son being the one who obeys his father. Bezae follows the order of Sinaiticus with respect to what each son says and does. However, Bezae then surprises its readers by concluding that the approved son is the one who disobeyed his father. The dissertation employs traditional models of textual criticism alongside newer methods, such as certain aspects of the Coherence Based Genealogical Method (CBGM), to argue for the superiority of the readings of Sinaiticus and Bezae over Vaticanus. In addition, the dissertation examines the history of interpretation of the parable in light of Matthew’s literary motifs and theological concerns with particular emphasis on Judaism, supersessionism, and anti-Jewish allegorical readings. The dissertation concludes that both Sinaiticus and Bezae have strong claims to being the most authentic reading but that the wording of Bezae is to be slightly preferred due to its status as the more difficult reading, its support among early translations, its greater resistance to allegorical interpretation, and its strong alignment with Matthean literary devices and theological themes.