8 Stephen W. Frary One of the problems with patristic citations is that the evidence must be carefully analyzed before it can be used. That is, one must be sure (a) that a given Father’s work has been faithfully transmitted, (b) that the Father was actually quoting (=copying), not merely “remembering” his NT, and (c) especially in the Gospels, that it was one Gospel and not another that was being quoted.17 However, Fee, in his discussion of Burgon’s treatment of 1 Tim 3:16 does not identify which, if any, of his citations are invalidated by (a) or (b), (c) being irrelevant in this case. Fee dismisses the weight of Burgon’s patristic evidence summarily, stating that “... the variant reading ‘God’ is unknown among the Greek Fathers before the last part of the fourth century.”18 However, the only earlier Greek witness for any reading in the UBSGNT apparatus is Ori- gen. Bruce Metzger’s warning concerning patristic evidence is pertinent in that case: After the true text of the Patristic author has been recovered, the further question must be raised whether the writer intended to quote the scriptural passage verbatim or merely to paraphrase it. If one is assured that the Father makes a bona fide quotation and not a mere allusion, the problem remains whether he quoted it after consulting the passage in a manuscript or whether he relied on memory... Furthermore, if the Father quotes the same passage more than once, it often happens that he does so in divergent forms. Origen is notorious in this regard, for he seldom quotes a passage twice in precisely the same words. Moreover, while dictating to one of his several amanuenses, Origen would sometimes refer merely to a few catchwords in the Scripture passage... later the amanuensis would hunt out the passage in a Biblical man- uscript and insert its words...19 It is not unreasonable, then, to conclude that the patristic evidence is definitely divided, therefore inconclusive, and, in light of the questions regarding specific citations, deserving of detailed study for this variant. Fee, “The Majority Text”, BT, 116. 17 Fee, “The Majority Text”, BT, 118. 18 B. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Res- 19 toration, 3d ed. (Oxford; New York 1992) 87-88.