The Background of the Greek '

J. Harold Greenlee

The Greek text from which the Author are called, almost certainly perished during ized or "King James" Version of the New the early days of the church. Since we do Testament was made is known as the "Re not possess the originals, our knowledge ceived" Text or Textus Receptus. This of what the New Testament writers ac form of the was the tually wrote is necessarily secondary. The standard text of the Christian Church for first, and most important, source is actual a thousand years prior to the appearance Greek manuscripts of the New Testament of the Authorized Version. Beginning or portions thereof. Of the 4000 extant with the publication of the manuscripts, the latest were written as late in 1881, however, recent English versions, as the invention of printing; while the two including the American Revised and the oldest, designated Codex B and Codex al- Revised Standard versions, have been eph were probably written as early as the based upon a form of the Greek text which fourth century. Some portions and frag differs appreciably from the Textus Re ments of manuscripts are dated as early as ceptus by various omissions, changes, and a the first part of the third century. Man few additions. These changes, for the uscripts written in uncial, or modified cap most part, are minor details; but there are ital, letters come from the second through instances where a phrase or passage is in the tenth centuries; while those written in question, as well as instances where a var minuscule letters, a sort of "literary long iant, though small, is important. hand," come from the ninth century up to the time of printing.* Most Greek manu For an understanding of the transition scripts are written on parchment, or vel from the Greek of the Authorized Version lum. The very earliest uncial fragments, �the Textus Receptus�to the form of however, are on papyrus; while paper be the Greek text now commonly accepted, gan to be used about the thirteenth century some of the of the understanding history and had entirely replaced parchment by the Greek New Testament is It necessary. end of the fifteenth century. A third type of should be that this is none recognized story � Greek manuscripts are lectionaries lesson too clear at a Neverthe good many points. books containing portions of the New Tes less, a may be offered working hypothesis tament selected for reading in church serv as a basis for the of the understanding ices. No lectionaries are known which of the Greek New Testament. background were written in the earliest manuscript 3)C jjc 5|c SjS period. The second principal source of knowl No one seriously claims that any of the of the Greek text is the versions of original manuscripts of the New Testament edge the New Testament. Translation of the are known. These "autographs," as they New Testament into other languages was

* the natural of ac- This article is based upon a paper of the same outgrowth missionary title read by the author at the University of Ken " tucky Foreign Language Conference, Lexington, It will be observed that both uncial and minus April 23, 1948. It is a semi-popular survey rather cule manuscripts were produced in the ninth and than an advanced or technical presentation. tenth centuries. 74 J. HAROLD GREENLEE

tivity; and the New Testament seems to certain obvious cautions are observed. It have undergone translation before it was must be ascertained, first of all, that the a century old. The earliest versions, which reading of the quotation or version as it are therefore the most important for the now stands has not itself suffered change text of the New Testament, are the several from the way in which it was first written ; (the Old Latin and the '), then it must be decided whether the orig Syriac (principally the Sinaitic, Cureton- inal quotation, or reading of the version, ian, Peshitto,* and the Palestinian Syriac was intended to represent the Greek accur lectionary), and Egyptian versions (prin ately rather than loosely. If these tests can cipally the Sahidic and Bohairic). It is satisfactorily be met, the fact that a given not, of course, the language of the version version or Church Father's quotations use itself which constitutes its value, but rather a given set of variants indicate to some the light which the version throws upon extent a place and an approximate date at the Greek text from which the version was which those variants were known and ac made. While a version will obviously be cepted. * * ** of no assistance in some types of variants, such as spelling, it may be very helpful in The early history of the Greek New others. A version, for instance, would be Testament was in certain respects different of no help in deciding between the var from that of most classical literature. iants KpdppaTOV and KpdcpaTOV. On the Most of the books of the New Testament other hand, in I Tim. 3:16 there is a var were written, not as literature or for lit iant between 8q d(|)av�pcb9r| and Ssoq erary purposes, but rather as private or �

text of the New Testament was at an end ; standardized text would vary slightly from for it then became possible to have careful manuscript to manuscript. But with the ly written, accessible easily manuscripts. printed editions it became possible to pro This, with the reverence together in which duce a completely standard text. The Byz the New Testament, was now held, gave antine type of text, in the form in which it rise to a standardized text from which new became the accepted Greek text of the New were and toward manuscripts copied which Testament, became known as the Textus old tended to be manuscripts corrected. Receptus ; and it is this form of the Greek This standardizing process probably con New Testament from which the Author tinued for four centuries or so, for the ized Version was made. This form of the need of verbal complete agreement of all text remained the accepted Greek text until was doubtless not manuscripts too keenly well within the past century. felt. If the second and third centuries The first printed Greek New Testament the of of comprised period divergence was edited by and was published the fourth manuscript readings, through in 1516, based upon a few manuscripts, the seventh be called the might period of none very ancient, which Erasmus hap the of this convergence readings. During pened to have. The Textus Receptus, or the period, manuscripts exhibiting variant Received Text, as it is commonly used readings of various localities would tend to today in England and America is the edi be either corrected to the standard text or tion of (Stephanus) of else set aside and not officially used. This 1550; while in Europe it is the 1633 edition correction of manuscripts, incidentally, of Elzevir. These latter two editions are would rarely be complete; with the result almost identical, and they in turn differ that many manuscripts would come to have only slightly from the edition of Erasmus. a text which was a mixture of the older About a century after the first Greek local text with the more obvious elements New Testament was printed, there began of the standardized and would text, pass the series of discoveries which ultimately this mixed text to along any manuscripts displaced the Textus Receptus from its copied from them. dominant position. As early as 1627 an How completely this standard text be ancient codex of the Greek Testament came the recognized Greek text of the New reached England as the gift of Cyril Lucar, Testament is pointed out by Sir Frederic patriarch of Constantinople. This manu Kenyon in his very readable book. The script, the now famous Codex Alexan- Story of the Bible. Kenyon states that drinus (Cod. A), proved to have been of the extant 96% manuscripts of the written about the fifth century, and was Greek New are Testament later than the therefore much older than any other eighth century, and of these only a hand known manuscript. Moreover, it was found ful show any substantial variation from the to contain many readings at variance with

� standard text that is, contain an appre the Received Text�readings whose age ciable amount of readings from the old demanded that they somehow be accounted local texts from which the standardized for. The impact of text was made." This standard church text, upon Biblical scholarship was such as to commonly designated the Byzantine text, inaugurate, slowly but with increasing mo- the text of practically all the later Greek memtum, a search for and the publication manuscripts, naturally became the text of the text of ancient New Testament which was used in the early printed Greek manuscripts�a search which is still con New Testaments. Due to human frailty, tinuing. This search proved highly reward so long as the New Testament was handed ing, both in the recovery of ancient manu down only in handwritten form, even this scripts and in revealing ancient readings in some of the later manuscripts; but for two centuries the results of this search 'Kenyon, Sir F. G. : The Story of the Bible, p. 39. were limited to listing variant readings as 76 J. HAROLD GREENLEE

D and which include a to the Textus Recep (Codd. D2), together tus, without attempting to change the text most of the New Testament and which con itself. tain some rather striking and characteristic with these * * ** readings. Together they lumped a miscellaneous assortment of variants and The half-century beginning with the designated it the "Western" text. The revision year 1830 marks the struggle for standardized Byzantine text, which they in the of what of the Received Text light called the "Syrian" text, was represented by was by then a considerable body of read practically everything else, including almost ings which gave evidence of being more all of the later manuscripts, versions, and nearly the original reading than the cor quotations. maintained found in the Textus responding readings that this standardized text had been pro scholars of men Receptus. Many worthy duced from the other text-types, by a proc tion contributed to the establishment of a ess of conflation of reading, selection of better but the work text; epoch-making the readings of one and another of the which the was largely through struggle texts, by smoothing over difficult wordings consummated was the joint labor of two and abrupt transitions, etc. They there B. F. Westcott and English clergymen, fore concluded that no reading of the Text F. A. Hort. the founda J. Building upon us Receptus could be correct unless it was tions which earlier scholars had West laid, given by one of the earlier texts. The cott and Hort an edition of the published readings of the Neutral text, moreover, New Testament which set aside the Textus would almost always be preferred to any Receptus in favor of a text which they felt other evidence. the words represented practically original will forever be indebt of the New Testament. It is worth noting ed to Westcott and Hort for their part in that both these scholars were on the com establishing these better readings�desig mittee which produced the Revised Ver nated a "critical" text because it is estab sion of the New Testament ; and their new lished by principles of textual criticism� edition of the Greek Testament, almost as the accepted Greek text of the New ready for publication, was considerably Testament. Nevertheless, in the half-cen used in the English version. tury since the publication of their work It was Westcott and Hort's theory of certain modifications have had to be made the transmission of the text, however, rath in their theory, due to further research er than their edition of the New Testament, and discoveries. One of the most signif which has ranked their work as the out icant of these is the isolation of what ap contribution in the standing history of text pears to be a new text-type, partially from ual criticism. the They advanced theory Westcott and Hort's "Western" text. This that the of the New original wording Tes new text is now commonly designated tament had been almost preserved exactly "Csesarean" because it seems to have been in what amounted to the consensus of the used by Origen and Eusebius in Caesarea. two fourth Codices century manuscripts, Developments leading up to the establish- Vaticanus and Sinaiticus B and (Codd. al- nient of this text include the discovery of eph), which are still recognized as the two similarities among the following : two fam oldest and best manuscripts. This concensus ilies of minuscule manuscripts, headed re they called the "Neutral" text. Another spectively by Codex 1 and Codex 13; Co small of group ancient and manu dex an uncial good 0, manuscript of rather un scripts and versions they designated the certain date; part of Codex W; the minus "Alexandrian" text, that postulating it was cule codices 28, 565, and 700; the Chester a scholarly revision of the Neutral text, Beatty papyrus P4S ; the Georgian, Armen made at Alexandria. A third text-type they ian, and the Palestinian Syriac versions; based two primarily upon manuscripts Co and the Gospel quotations from the writ dex Bezae and ings of Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and THE BACKGROUND OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 77 part of Origen's writings. The Caesarean explanation of its origin and these readings text itself now need to may be divided into is yet to be given. two texts, centered around family 13 and * * 3|: :|c Codex 9 with the respectively, former There are some thousands of variants group native not to Csesarea but possibly within the manuscripts of the New Tes to the Fayum region of Egypt. tament. The sources of these variants are the 4000 extant A second modification of the theory of manuscripts of the Greek text and 9000 Westcott and Hort is the combination by manuscripts of various ver sions�a number far most scholars of the so-called Neutral and in excess of the man of almost Alexandrian texts, under the designation uscripts any classical writer. "Alexandrian." These the text tradition This is due to a feeling manuscripts carry back to within two or three that the two do not represent separate text- centuries of the which is far types but merely degrees of faithfulness to original writings, closer than a in the case of most ancient literature. single text-type. The designation, or at This mass of variants make it least the implication, of the term "Neutral probable that the search for the exact text" has largely been discarded. It is felt original words of the New that no Testament will be "an eternal one or two single manuscripts can ap proximation toward an unrealizable claim to have preserved all of the original ideal"; but on the other hand the is words of the New Testament, in complete probability very small indeed that real accuracy. any part of the text should be completely lost from this In spite of these modifications of theory, excellent body of witnesses. Moreover, the however, a variant attested by the Alex two most widely divergent manuscripts of andrian witnesses including the codices the New Testament would show a verbal Vaticanus and Sinaiticus is almost always agreement of approximately 90%. We may as the best and therefore accepted reading, the text agree with Kenyon that "the gen as reconstructed by Westcott and Hort still eral result of all these discoveries and all stands essentially approved. this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our con The so-called Western text, in addition viction that we have in our hands, in sub to losing part of its tribe to the Caesarean, stantial integrity, the veritable Word of has been to much further subjected study, God.'" particularly to account for its many pecul iar additions in Luke and a Acts; but full "Ihid., p. 144.