P107 (P. Oxy. 4446): A Critical Analysis of Its Textual Affiliation and Witness to John 17:1–2, 11

Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

The discovery and publication of Papyrus 107 (𝔓107), catalogued as P. Oxy. 4446, represents a valuable contribution to the corpus of early Greek New Testament manuscripts. The fragment, containing portions of John 17:1–2 and 17:11, has garnered scholarly interest due to its textual affiliation, date, and physical characteristics. While its fragmentary state imposes limitations on definitive textual conclusions, the data it yields is nonetheless critical for reconstructing the textual history of the Fourth Gospel. This study provides an exhaustive textual-critical evaluation of 𝔓107, including paleographical observations, variant analysis, and comparison with early uncials and papyri.

Paleographical and Codicological Features

𝔓107 is dated to the early third century (ca. 200–250 C.E.), although a more precise paleographical argument could situate it as early as 200 C.E. due to its similarities with P. Oxy. 2659, as noted by W.E.H. Cockle. While Cockle maintained caution in dating, noting differences in epsilon and kappa and the sloped writing, the overall style resonates closely with late second-century documentary hands. The script may best be classified as semi-literary, exhibiting traits of both professional book-hand and cursive influence. The fragmentary leaf suggests a format of approximately 33 lines per page, and the ink, fiber, and format confirm the typical codex construction seen in Christian manuscripts of this period.

Textual Character

𝔓107 does not conform neatly to any of the four primary text-types—Alexandrian, Western, Byzantine, or Caesarean. However, it demonstrates the strongest alignment with Codex Washingtonianus (W), a member of the so-called “Western” family, though with an erratic mixture of readings. The “erratic” designation reflects a textual tradition that either predates strict text-type classification or represents an early, localized textual stream. It may well reflect a transitional stage in textual transmission before the textual stabilizations evident in later Alexandrian or Byzantine witnesses.

The preservation of John 17 in 𝔓107, though partial, provides a snapshot of the textual fluidity in early third-century Egyptian Christianity, especially in Oxyrhynchus—a known center of Christian manuscript production.

Detailed Textual Analysis

John 17:1

και ο υς (υιος) – This reading in 𝔓107 omits the possessive “σου” (“your”) found in several other witnesses. The shorter form is supported by 𝔓107, 𝔚 (Codex Washingtonianus), א (Sinaiticus), B (Vaticanus), and several other early uncials and papyri. This shorter reading is likely original due to its early attestation and due to the scribal tendency to expand christological references, especially in liturgical contexts. The inclusion of “σου” in manuscripts like A, D, and Θ likely reflects this expansion.

This variant offers a clear example of documentary evidence outweighing internal arguments. The shorter reading, lacking “σου,” is both the lectio brevior and lectio difficilior—being less theologically explanatory and thus less likely to be a secondary insertion.

John 17:2 (First Clause)

δως (give) – This imperative form is attested in 𝔓107, Codex W, and L. It contrasts with variants like “δωση” (subjunctive), “δωσω” (future indicative), and “δωσει” (present indicative), each of which introduces a different syntactical and theological nuance. The imperative likely reflects the original, as it aligns with the petitionary tone of the prayer, consistent with verse 1’s δοξασον.

The present imperative emphasizes a direct request and is simpler than the more nuanced subjunctive forms found in the Byzantine tradition (δωση) and Alexandrian manuscripts like B (δωσει). The imperative also finds support in internal logic, maintaining the petitionary structure between verses 1 and 2.

John 17:2 (Second Clause)

αυτω (to him) – 𝔓107, along with 𝔚 and 0109, supports the singular dative pronoun, agreeing with the referent “τον υιον” from verse 1. This contrasts with the plural αυτοις (“to them”) found in Alexandrian and Byzantine witnesses such as B, A, and Ψ. The singular pronoun coheres contextually, referring to the Son as the recipient of authority over “all flesh” (πασης σαρκος). This confirms the individual focus of the passage and supports the narrative’s christological emphasis.

D’s omission here is highly unlikely original, given both contextual coherence and the uniform testimony of other manuscripts.

John 17:11 (First Clause)

ουκετι ειμι εν τω κοσμω και εν τω κοσμω ειμι – This phrase, preserved in 𝔓107 (though partially visible), is found only in D and a few Old Latin witnesses. The overwhelming majority of early manuscripts omit the repetition. The reading may reflect a scribal gloss attempting to harmonize or clarify Jesus’ position—being about to depart the world yet still present during the prayer. The omission in the majority of early Alexandrian and Byzantine witnesses favors the shorter text as original.

Given that 𝔓107 has an unclear text at this location (indicated by vid), it cannot be decisively cited as a firm witness to this clause. However, its potential support alongside D is noteworthy, as it may reflect an early, if isolated, textual tradition.

John 17:11 (Second Clause)

ω εδωκας – The reading in 𝔓107 aligns with 𝔓66, א, L, W, and 579, as opposed to the more grammatically refined “ω δεδωκας” in B, A, and other Alexandrian witnesses. The use of the aorist “εδωκας” (“you gave”) is more in line with the narrative flow of John, which frequently uses aorists in describing the Father’s past actions toward the Son and the disciples.

The aorist implies a completed act—God has already given the disciples to Jesus—while the perfect form (“δεδωκας”) could suggest an ongoing state. In this context, the aorist better reflects Johannine temporal patterns and supports the 𝔓107 reading.

John 17:11 (Third Clause)

εν καθως και ημεις – 𝔓107 stands with 𝔓66c (possibly), B, Θ, 579, and others in reading the fuller phrase “in this way also we,” over against the truncated “εν καθως ημεις” of most other manuscripts. The presence of “και” reinforces the emphasis on the unity between Jesus and the Father as the model for believers’ unity. The omission of “και” could be due to homoioteleuton or scribal abbreviation for liturgical clarity.

Its inclusion in early Alexandrian manuscripts and 𝔓107 gives it strong weight for authenticity. Theologically, the reading with “και” heightens the unity theme of John 17 without affecting doctrinal content.

Observations on Textual Affiliation

Although 𝔓107 is too small to classify definitively within one of the major text-types, its affinities with 𝔚 and support for early singular or minor readings suggest that it belongs to a textual stratum that predates the full development of the Alexandrian or Byzantine text-types. Its combination of readings places it closer to the so-called “Western” textual tradition, although not exclusively. Its agreement with 𝔓66 and Codex L in several places reflects overlapping traditions.

Furthermore, the textual independence of 𝔓107 is notable. It neither follows the Byzantine majority nor conforms strictly to the Alexandrian archetype. Instead, it represents a valuable witness to the variety of early texts circulating in Egypt during the early third century.

The Reading Culture of Early Christianity

Importance for New Testament Textual Criticism

𝔓107 exemplifies several principles foundational to conservative textual criticism:

The Priority of Early Papyri: As a manuscript from ca. 200–250 C.E., 𝔓107 provides evidence closer to the autographs than any medieval uncial or minuscule.
The Need for the Documentary Approach: Its alignment with singular readings and early uncials underlines the need to prioritize external manuscript evidence rather than eclectic preferences for internal stylistic judgments.
Support for Textual Stability: Despite its erratic elements, 𝔓107 does not introduce significant doctrinal or theological innovations. It supports the notion that early textual transmission, even in diverse forms, preserved core content with high fidelity.

Conclusion

While fragmentary, 𝔓107 contributes significantly to our understanding of the textual transmission of John 17. Its readings display both stability and variance, confirming that early Christian communities in Oxyrhynchus had access to well-preserved Gospel texts, though not always those aligning with later standardized text-types. Its paleographical features argue for an early third-century date, and its textual character offers insight into the diversity of early New Testament manuscripts. Most importantly, 𝔓107, like its fellow early papyri, reaffirms the trustworthiness of the New Testament text by illustrating that deviations in minor elements never amount to substantive theological corruption. The Gospel of John, even in its early fragmentary witnesses, remains consistent in proclaiming the same divine message handed down from the apostles.

You May Also Enjoy

Dual Authorship of Matthew: Inspired Hebrew Origins and a Spirit-Led Greek Rewrite in the First Century

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).