87 Son and Chosen. A Text-critical Study of John 1,34 by the scholars dealing with this variant reading– includes P66 P75 A B D Θ Byz vg syrh copbo Origen. This combination is seen as decisive by many exegetes. The internal evidence is also strong. The phrase appears elsewhere in the Fourth Gospel as the author’s favourite designation of Jesus (1,49; 3,18; 5,25; 10,36; 11,4.27; 19,7; 20,31) and thus conforms to the style of the Fourth Evangelist. The concept of υ ς is seen as the primary meaning for the theology of the Fourth Evangelist. Such a concept has a messianic background in the Old Testament (Ps 2,7). The reading υ ς το θεο is taken as a part of the Christian tradition con- nected with the baptismal confession and was naturally followed by the Fourth Evangelist. Earlier it was also argued that doctrinal controversies have little bearing on this reading, because it is found in the early papyri, which were taken not to suffer from theological alterations. This view is no longer accepted as valid. It is not used by recent advocates of υ ς το θεο . The editorial committee of the NA27 accepted this reading as “original” and the editorial committee of the UBS4 gave it a “B” rating, indicating that in their view the reading is almost certain. The rival read- ing κλεκτ ς το θεο is considered to be a scribal harmonisation. It is argued that scribes would alter υ ός to κλεκτ ς either because of Markan phrase γαπητ ς (Mark 1,11), which is a parallel text to John 1,34 with a similar kind of meaning as κλεκτ ς, or because of Isa 42,1 LXX, which speaks of Israel as κλεκτ ς μου. In the latter case it is possible to argue that the scribes would liken the descent of the Spirit on Israel to the descent of the Spirit on Jesus and alter the text accord- ingly. The external evidence for κλεκτ ς το θεο is considered too weak to overthrow the one for υ ς το θεο , because most of the early witnesses are of the D-text7. A more inventive argument in its favour is a use of chiastic structure to parallel v. 34 with v. 49, which has an unques- tionable reading of υ ς το θεο 8. Other variant readings are usually ignored or they are seen too weak externally for serious consideration. 7 I follow the categories used by E.J. Epp, because the older categories (Alexandrian, Western, Caesarean, Byzantine) are somewhat misleading. The A-text corresponds to the Byzantine text, the B-text is based on P75 B pair with their allies, the C-text marks any free and/or mixed text, which includes the Caesarean text, and the D-text is based on Codex D with its allies. For reasons to use this nomenclature, see E.J. Epp, “The Significance of the Papyri for Determining the Nature of the New Testament Text in the Second Century. A Dynamic View of Textual Transmission”, in W.L. Petersen (ed.), Gospel Traditions in the Second Century. Origins, Recensions, Text and Transmission (Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity 3; Notre Dame, IN 1989) 1-32. 8 The chiastic structure offered by P.F. Ellis looks like this: (a) The Baptist witnesses to Jesus (1,19-39), (b) Andrew finds Simon (1,40-41), (c) Jesus changes Simon’s name to Peter (1,42), (b´) Philip finds Nathanael (1,43-45), (a´) Nathanael witnesses to Jesus (1,46-51). See P.F. Ellis, The Genius of John. A Composition-Critical Commentary on the Fourth Gospel (Collegeville, MN 1984) 30, 34.