Professor of Religion
Tusculum University
Travis B. Williams is Professor of Religion at Tusculum University. The Catholic Epistles occupy a central place in his scholarship. He is the author of two major monographs on the letter of 1 Peter—Persecution in 1 Peter (Brill) and Good Works in 1 Peter (Mohr Siebeck)—as well as the 1 Peter volume in the International Critical Commentary series (Bloomsbury T&T Clark). At the moment, he is preparing a commentary on Jude and 2 Peter for the Anchor Yale Bible Commentary series (Yale University Press). His research also focuses on ancient media culture, with publications in this area including two volumes on the Dead Sea Scrolls—History and Memory in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Cambridge University Press) and The Dead Sea Scrolls in Ancient Media Culture (Brill)—along with a monograph examining the role of secretaries in the composition of New Testament epistles (Secretaries in Ancient Letter Writing [Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht]).
Friday, May 29 | 1:20-2:10 | Main Room
Reading 1 Peter with the Scribes: Pronominal Variation, Scribal Alteration, and the Editio Critica Maior
This paper examines pronominal variation in the manuscript tradition of 1 Peter as a test case for assessing how the Editio Critica Maior (ECM) reshapes the relationship between textual criticism, exegesis, and translation. Focusing on alternations between first- and second-person plural pronouns (e.g., ἡμεῖς/ὑμεῖς), the study addresses a longstanding debate: whether such variants arose primarily from accidental phonological confusion or from intentional scribal engagement with the text’s theological and ecclesial claims.
Drawing on the extensive witness data preserved in the ECM, the paper advances a mixed explanatory model. While acknowledging that some pronominal variants are best explained as mechanical copying errors—especially where changes result in grammatical or contextual incoherence—the study demonstrates that a significant subset of variants exhibits clear patterns inconsistent with random error. Through quantitative analysis of over 150,000 manuscript attestations across multiple New Testament corpora, the paper identifies statistically significant directionality (a preference for shifts from “you” to “we”), genre sensitivity (higher rates in epistolary literature), and clustering at passages of theological or soteriological importance. These features point toward scribal intervention shaped by communal identification and theological inclusivity.
Applied specifically to 1 Peter, the analysis shows that pronominal variation is neither widespread nor chaotic, but concentrated in rhetorically charged contexts such as Christ’s suffering, communal identity, and participation in salvation. These variants illuminate how early scribes negotiated the boundary between the letter’s original addressees and the ongoing life of the church. The paper argues that the ECM should therefore be read not only as a repository of textual decisions but as an analytical instrument that makes visible the interpretive history embedded in transmission itself. Such findings have direct implications for exegesis, translation, and theological reflection, encouraging interpreters to read 1 Peter—and the New Testament more broadly—with the scribes as active participants in the text’s reception history.