Text Criticism

Text Criticism Matthew 14.22-33 NOTE: You will definitely want to check out the comments in Metzger’s A Textual Commentary on the Greek NT! Verse 24 – Where exactly was the boat? NA27 τὸ δὲ πλοῖον ἤδη ✕σταδίους πολλοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἀπεῖχεν✖ … NET Meanwhile the boat, already far from land,23 … [23Grk "The boat was already many stades from the land."] NRS but by this time the boat … was far from the land,1 … [1Other ancient authorities read was out on the sea] KJV But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, …. 1

4 1. Note that the NET and NRSV are reading the same Greek text but providing a dynamic equivalency rather than a literal translation. (The NET provides the literal reading in its footnote.) Which Greek text (123or4) are they reading? 4 2. Which Greek text are the NRSV footnote and the KJV reading? (123or4) 2 3. Which text has the best external evidence? 4, 2 4. On what grounds will you argue for the best reading?

The question is whether Matthew was here assimilated by copyists to John (σταδίους εἴκοσι πέντε ἢ τριάκοντα, Jn 6.19) or to Mark (ἦν τὸ πλοῖον ἐν μέσῳ τῆς θαλάσσης, Mk 6.47). Since the process of harmonization more often took place among the Synoptic Gospels than between the Fourth Gospel and one of the Synoptics, and since the Johannine parallel is very slight (involving among Greek witnesses only the word σταδίους),22 it appears that the reading of B ¦13 al best accounts for the rise of the others. Verse 27 – (Be sure to check the notes in your NET Bible for this verse!) NA27 εὐθὺς δὲ ἐλάλησεν ✕[ὀ Ἰησοῦς] αὐτοῖς✖ λέγων… NRS But immediately Jesus spoke to them and said, … 1

3 5. Why is ὀ Ἰησοῦς in brackets in the text? editors unsure if original or not 6. What does the “Majority Text” read? αὐτοῖς ὀ Ἰησοῦς 7. What does the original version of Codex Sinaiticus read? αὐτοῖς 8. What does the corrected version of Codex Sinaiticus read? ὀ Ἰησοῦς αὐτοῖς 9. According to Metzger and to the NET Bible note, the second reading could be explained as the result of “homoioteleuton.” What does that mean? 10. Why is reading 3 to be preferred? D 073 892 pc ff1 syc sa bo). Although such *א) Most witnesses have ὁ Ἰησοῦς (ho IeÒsous, "Jesus"), while a few lack the words additions are often suspect (due to liturgical influences, piety, or for the sake of clarity), in this case it is likely that ὁ Ἰησοῦς dropped out accidentally. Apart from a few albeit important witnesses, as noted above, the rest of the tradition has either ὁ Ἰησοῦς αὐτοῖς (ho IeÒsous autois) or αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς (autois ho IeÒsous). In uncial letters, with Jesus' name as a nomen sacrum, this would have been written as αυτοισοισμ or οισμαυτοισ. Thus homoioteleuton could explain the reason for the omission of Jesus' name. CodexB Codex Sinaiticus Verse 29 NA27 Πέτρος περιεπάτησεν ἐπὶ τὰ ὕδατα ✕καὶ ἦλθεν✖ πρὸς τὸν Ἰησοῦν. NRS So Peter… started walking on the water, and came toward Jesus. KJVAnd Peter … walked on the water, to go to Jesus. 1

3 11. Translate into English what the Majority Text reads. Peter walked upon the waters to come to Jesus 12. Translate into English what the original text of Codex Sinaiticus reads. .. to come. He came, therefore, ... 13. From these three examples in verses 24, 27, 29, which manuscript appears to be the best in each case? B = Vaticanus Verse 30 NA27 βλέπων δὲ τὸν ἄνεμον [ἰσχυρὸν] NRS But when he noticed the strong wind,1… (1Other ancient authorities read the wind) NIV But when he saw the wind,…

ἄνεμον [ἰσχυρόν] {C} From the standpoint of external evidence, although the combination of a B* 073 33 copsa, bo, fay is impressive attestation, a majority of the Committee considered it too exclusively Egyptian to be followed here, where the shorter text may have arisen by accidental omission in the ancestor of one text-type. From the standpoint of internal considerations, although it can be argued that ἰσχυρόν was added by scribes in order to heighten the dramatic effect (as σφόδρα was added in W), a majority was inclined to regard its presence as intrinsically required in order to explain Peter’s increasing fear. In order to represent these conflicting considerations the Committee decided to retain ἰσχυρόν in the text, but to enclose it within square brackets. Metzger Commentary

14.24 σταδίους πολλοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἀπεῖχεν {C}

The question is whether Matthew was here assimilated by copyists to John (σταδίους εἴκοσι πέντε ἢ τριάκοντα, Jn 6.19) or to Mark (ἦν τὸ πλοῖον ἐν μέσῳ τῆς θαλάσσης, Mk 6.47). Since the process of harmonization more often took place among the Synoptic Gospels than between the Fourth Gospel and one of the Synoptics, and since the Johannine parallel is very slight (involving among Greek witnesses only the word σταδίους),22 it appears that the reading of B ¦13 al best accounts for the rise of the others.

14.29 καὶ ἦλθεν {B}

The reading καὶ ἦλθεν (“Peter walked upon the water and came to Jesus”) seemed to say too much, and therefore was altered to ἐλθεῖν (“Peter walked upon the water to come to Jesus”). Although the reading of a* has the appearance of being a conflation, it may be merely an exegetical expansion introduced by the scribe. The reading of ethro is a translational error.

14.30 ἄνεμον [ἰσχυρόν] {C}

From the standpoint of external evidence, although the combination of a B* 073 33 copsa, bo, fay is impressive attestation, a majority of the Committee considered it too exclusively Egyptian to be followed here, where the shorter text may have arisen by accidental omission in the ancestor of one text-type. From the standpoint of internal considerations, although it can be argued that ἰσχυρόν was added by scribes in order to heighten the dramatic effect (as σφόδρα was added in W), a majority was inclined to regard its presence as intrinsically required in order to explain Peter’s increasing fear. In order to represent these conflicting considerations the Committee decided to retain ἰσχυρόν in the text, but to enclose it within square brackets.