DOCSLIB.ORG

247 Matt. 18:2 “Jesus” (TR & AV) {A} Preliminary Textual Discussion. The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
247 Matt. 18:2 “Jesus” (TR & AV) {A} Preliminary Textual Discussion. The 247 Matt. 18:2 “Jesus” (TR & AV) {A} Preliminary Textual Discussion. The First Matter. Tischendorf considers that without qualification the variant is followed by F 09 (9th century). By contrast, Swanson considers that the original Byzantine manuscript F 09 was blank at this verse, and that a later “corrector” added in its present verse 2 (I assume sometime before the end of the 16th century). I am unable to inspect this manuscript myself. But either way, the variant is a minority Byzantine reading, since it was either originally part of F 09, or was subsequently written out as the variant by a Byzantine scribe. Moreover nothing much hangs on this, since one can show the reading inside the closed class of sources from elsewhere. The Second Matter (Diatessaron formatting). Inside the closed class of sources, the Vulgate reads Latin, “ Iesus (Jesus),” at both Matt. 18:2 and Luke 9:47. As a consequence of Diatessaron formatting, it is not possible to tell if the prima facie reading of Matt. 18:2 in the Latin Vulgate Codex of the Sangallensis Diatessaron, got its Latin, “Ihesus (Jesus),” from one or both of these sources. Thus no reference is made to this Diatessaron, infra . Likewise, outside the closed class of sources, due to Diatessaron formatting, it is not possible to tell where the prima facie reading of Luke 9:47 in Ciasca’s Latin-Arabic Diatessaron got the Latin, “ Iesus ,” from. Thus once again, no reference is made to this Diatessaron, infra . Principal Textual Discussion. At Matt. 18:2, the TR’s Greek, “ o (-) Iesous (Jesus),” in the words, “And Jesus called” etc. (AV), are supported by the majority Byzantine text e.g., W 032 (5th century, which is Byzantine in Matt. 1-28; Luke 8:13-24:53), Sigma 042 (late 5th / 6th century); and Lectionaries 2378 (11th century) and 1968 (1544 A.D.) (in both instances the Lectionaries abbreviate o Iesous / O IHCOYC to O IC with a line on top of IC ). Though the precise place at the beginning of the sentence varies, it is also found as Latin, “ Iesus (Jesus),” in Jerome’s Latin Vulgate (5th century), and old Latin Versions a (4th century), e (4th / 5th century), b (5th century), d (5th century), ff2 (5th century), f (6th century), q (6th / 7th century), aur (7th century), 1 (7th / 8th century), g1 (8th / 9th century), ff1 (10th / 11th century), and c (12th / 13th century). From the Latin support for this reading, it is manifested in the Clementine Vulgate (1592). Though place after, rather than before, “paidion (a little child),” as in the TR, the reading is further supported by the ancient church Greek writer, Origen (d. 254) ( Variant 1 ). However, the Greek, “ o (-) Iesous (Jesus),” is omitted in a variant ( Variant 2 ). This is a minority Byzantine reading found in F 09 (9th century) and V 031 (9th century). It is also found in the ancient church Greek writer, Chrysostom (d. 407). 248 There is no good textual argument against the representative Byzantine text which is therefore correct. The origins of the variants are speculative. Was Variant 1 an accidental change? In Manuscript Washington (W 032) at e.g., Matt. 24:24, “ megala ” / “great,” was first omitted due to ellipsis loss on the preceding meia , being at the start of a line in continuous script, in which “ meia ” is part of “ semeia ” / “signs,” but the “ se” is on the previous line; and then megala was written in the side- margin with a footnote-like indicator as to where it should be placed. In such scribal practice, words might drop out due to scribal error, and be reinserted a little bit later, providing the basic meaning was still the same. (Cf. my comments at Matt. 17:3b; 17:4; 17:5, 17:17b, discussed simultaneously in App 3.) In the continuous script W 032, the “ O (-) IHCOYC (Jesus),” is abbreviated (with a line on top where I have a line underneath,) as “ OIC .” But whether or not this abbreviation was used, we know that short words were sometimes lost. E.g., were these two words lost due to an ellipsis with the final “C” (sigma) of the previous word, “proskalesamenos (‘calling’ = ‘called,’ AV),” and then added back in after? I.e., in looking at “ ΠPOCKA ΛECAMENOCOIC ,” did Origen’s mind become befuddled with the “OCOIC ” ending, so that his eye jumped from one “C” (sigma) to the next, at which point he wrote, “ ΠAI ∆ION (a little child),” and then, suddenly realizing his mistake, did he then add back in, “ OIC (Jesus)”? Was Variant 1 a deliberate change? Did Origen regard it as some kind of “stylistic improvement” to put “ o (-) Iesous (Jesus),” after, rather than before, “ paidion (a little child)”? Importantly, the meaning of Variant 1 is not different to that of the TR’s reading, which it thus supports. Was Variant 2 an accidental alteration? E.g., due to ellipsis per Variant 1 , supra , was the “ OIC (Jesus)” lost, but not detected? Was Variant 2 a deliberate change? Due to the presence of “ o (-) Iesous (Jesus),” in Matt. 18:1, did a scribe regard its presence here at Matt. 18:2 as “superfluous wordage,” and so remove it on the basis of “redundancy”? Deliberate or accidental changes? We do not know. But we do know that they were changes to the original Received Text. The TR’s reading has rock solid support in the Greek as the representative Byzantine reading against which there is no good textual argument. It also has the monolithic support of the Latin text, being found in both St. Jerome’s Vulgate and all old Latin versions. By contrast, the variant has slim support and does not remedy a clear and obvious textual problem in the representative Byzantine text. On the system of rating textual readings A to E, I would give the TR’s reading at Matt. 18:2 an “A” i.e., the text of the TR is the correct reading and has a high level of certainty. 249 Textual History Outside the Closed Class of Three Witnesses. Outside the closed class of sources the correct reading at Matt. 18:2, “Jesus,” is found in the leading representative of the Western text, Codex D 05 (5th century). It is further found in (the independent) Codex Delta 037 (9th century) and (the mixed text type) Codex Theta 038 (9th century). It is also found in Minuscules 565 (9th century, independent), 1424 (9th / 10th century, mixed text type in Matthew and Luke, independent in Mark, Byzantine elsewhere), 157 (independent, 12th century), 1071 (independent, 12th century), and 579 (mixed text, 13th century); together with the Family 13 Manuscripts , which contain Minuscules 788 (11th century, independent text), 346 (12th century, independent), 543 (12th century, independent), 826 (12th century, independent), 828 (12th century, independent), 983 (12th century, independent), 13 (13th century, independent), et al . It is further found in all extant Syriac versions e.g., the Curetonian Version (3rd / 4th century); Egyptian Coptic Sahidic (3rd century) and Middle Egyptian (3rd century) Versions; and Armenian Version (5th century). However Variant 2 , which omits, “Jesus,” is found in the two leading Alexandrian texts, Rome Vaticanus (4th century) and London Sinaiticus (4th century). It is also found in (the mixed text type) Codex L 019 (8th century), (the independent text type) Codex Z 035 (6th century), and (the independent, but Byzantine influenced,) Codex 078 (Matt. 17-18, 19; Luke 18:14-25; John 4:52-5:8; 20:17-26; 6th century). It is further found in Minuscules 892 (9th century, mixed text type) and 700 (11th century, independent); as well as the Family 1 Manuscripts , which contain Minuscules 1 (12th century, independent text in the Gospels, Byzantine elsewhere), 1582 (12th century, independent Matt.-Jude), 209 (14th century, independent in the Gospels and Revelation, Byzantine elsewhere), et al . It is also found in the Egyptian Coptic Bohairic Version (3rd century); and Ethiopic Version (Dillmann, 18th / 19th centuries). At Matt. 18:2, the erroneous Variant 2 was adopted by the NU Text et al . Thus the ASV reads, “And he called” etc. The incorrect reading is also found in the NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, and NIV. But perhaps influenced by the correct reading in the Western Text, Syriac Versions, and most Egyptian versions, for the wrong reasons, the right reading was adopted by the TCNT and TEV. Matt. 18:6 “about his neck” (TR & AV) {B} Preliminary Textual Discussion. The First Matter. The translation of the King James Version at Matt. 18:6, “about,” in, “were hanged about his neck,” might have been based on either Reading 1a or Reading 1b, infra . On the one hand, Reading 1b, “ epi (about),” as adopted by Scrivener, and is prima facie the more likely possibility given that it was used in various 16th century printed Greek texts e.g., Erasmus (1516 & 1522) and Stephanus (1550). 250 But on the other hand, the relatively wide usage of Reading 1a , “ peri (about), in ancient times by e.g., Origen, St. Cyril - twice, and St. Basil - thrice 1, means that the King James translators may well have preferred it. Thus we cannot be sure which of these two readings was preferred (and perhaps some translators preferred Reading 1a and others Reading 1b). But in either instance, the meaning and translation into English as “about,” is the same. The Second Matter. When earlier Byzantine manuscripts, such as Codex Freerianus (W 032, 5th century, Byzantine in Matt. 1-28; Luke 8:13-24:53) or Codex Rossanensis (Sigma 042, late 5th / 6th century), are rediscovered, they are included inside the closed class of sources, since they represent a text type known though time and over time 2.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ellen White's Visions & 2 Esdras
    Why Liberalism Failed: Opportunity and Wake-Up Call • “It Was Not Taught Me By Man”: Ellen White’s Visions & 2 Esdras • Sola Scriptura and the Future of Bible Interpretation • A Brief History of the Apocrypha • Erasmus and the New Testament • Ellen White and Blacks, Part III • Unintended Consequences, Accountability, and Being Loved VOLUME 46 ISSUE 1 ■ 2018 SPECTRUM is a journal established to encourage Seventh-day Adventist participation in the discussion of contemporary issues from a Christian viewpoint, to look without prejudice at all sides of a subject, to evaluate the merits of diverse views, and to foster Christian intellectual and cultural growth. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED COPYRIGHT © 2017 ADVENTIST FORUM Although effort is made to ensure accurate scholarship and discriminating judgment, the statements of fact Editor Bonnie Dwyer are the responsibility of contributors, and the views Editorial Assistants Wendy Trim, Linda Terry individual authors express are not necessarily those of Design Mark Dwyer the editorial staff as a whole or as individuals. Spectrum Web Team Alita Byrd, Pam Dietrich, Bonnie Dwyer, Rich Hannon, Steve Hergert, Wendy Trim, Jared SPECTRUM is published by Adventist Forum, a non- Wright, Alisa Williams; managing editor subsidized, nonprofit organization for which gifts are deductible in the report of income for purposes of taxation. The publishing of SPECTRUM depends on subscriptions, gifts from individuals, and the voluntary efforts of the contributors. ABOUT THE COVER Editorial Board: ART AND ARTIST: Beverly Beem Richard Rice SPECTRUM can be accessed on the World Wide Web at Walla Walla, Washington Riverside, California Besides creating art and writing www.spectrummagazine.org.
    [Show full text]
  • And the Goal of New Testament Textual Criticism
    RECONSTRUCTING THE TEXT OF THE CHURCH: THE “CANONICAL TEXT” AND THE GOAL OF NEW TESTAMENT TEXTUAL CRITICISM by DAVID RICHARD HERBISON A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Master of Arts in Biblical Studies We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard ............................................................................... Dr. Kent Clarke, Ph.D.; Thesis Supervisor ................................................................................ Dr. Craig Allert, Ph.D.; Second Reader TRINITY WESTERN UNIVERSITY December 2015 © David Richard Herbison ABSTRACT Over the last several decades, a number of scholars have raised questions about the feasibility of achieving New Testament textual criticism’s traditional goal of establishing the “original text” of the New Testament documents. In light of these questions, several alternative goals have been proposed. Among these is a proposal that was made by Brevard Childs, arguing that text critics should go about reconstructing the “canonical text” of the New Testament rather than the “original text.” However, concepts of “canon” have generally been limited to discussions of which books were included or excluded from a list of authoritative writings, not necessarily the specific textual readings within those writings. Therefore, any proposal that seeks to apply notions of “canon” to the goals and methods of textual criticism warrants further investigation. This thesis evaluates Childs’
    [Show full text]
  • Current Theology Literature of Christian Antiquity: 1979-1983 Walter J
    Theological Studies 45 (1984) CURRENT THEOLOGY LITERATURE OF CHRISTIAN ANTIQUITY: 1979-1983 WALTER J. BURGHARDT, S.J. Georgetown University At the Ninth International Conference on Patristic Studies (Oxford, Sept. 5-10,1983), some 40 reports were scheduled for presentation under the rubric Instrumenta studiorum, i.e., institutions, series of publications, and projects which are of interest to patristic scholars and, more gener­ ally, students of early Christianity. As on previous occasions, so now, through the graciousness of the Conference's principal organizer, Eliza­ beth A. Livingstone, and with the co-operation of the scholars who prepared the presentations, it has become possible for me to offer reports on 32 of the instrumenta to a still wider public in these pages. My bulletin is an adaptation, primarily in style, on occasion in content (e.g., fresh information since the Conference); here and there space has exacted a digest. If, therefore, errors have crept in, they must surely be laid to my account (e.g., failure to grasp the exact sense of the original report, especially when composed in a language not native to me). It should be noted that a fair amount of information on the background, purpose, and program of some of the instrumenta is to be found in previous bulletins (cf. TS 17 [1956] 67-92; 21 [1960] 62-91; 33 [1972] 253-84; 37 [1976] 424-55; 41 [1980] 151-80; see also 24 [1963] 437-63). LES PSEUDÉPIGRAPHES D'ANCIEN TESTAMENT1 The year 1963 saw an important project inaugurated on the instruments de travail necessary for study of the OT pseudepigrapha, i.e., nonbiblical and prerabbinic Jewish religious literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Text of the Gospel of Mark: Lake Revisited
    BABELAO 3 (2014), p. 145-169 + Appendix, p. 171-289 © ABELAO (Belgium) The « Caesarean » Text of the Gospel of Mark: Lake Revisited By Didier Lafleur IRHT - Paris n the field of history and practice of New Testament textual criticism, two major stages were initiated during the last cen- tury by Kirsopp Lake. The first of these was the publication, Iin 19 02, of a survey concerning Codex 1 of the Gospels and its Allies, in the Texts and Studies series (7:3). The second stage was the pub- lication, in 1928, with Robert P. Blake and Silva New, of « The Caesarean Text of the Gospel of Mark » in the Harvard Theological Review (21:4). For the first time, the authors emphasized the exist- ence of such text on the basis of three major pieces of evidence: the Greek manuscripts, the patristic witnesses and the Oriental versions. Since then, the question of the « Caesarean » text-type has been a very disputed matter. It still remains an important tex- tual issue.1 1 This paper was first presented during the Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting 2012, Chicago, November 18. 146 D. LAFLEUR Our plan is not to discuss here about the « Caesarean » text and its subsequent developments, but to mainly focus the genesis of Lake’s publication. The survey of his preliminary works will help us to better consider, after a short account of Lake’s biobibliography, the way he followed until the 1928 « Caesarean Text of the Gospel of Mark » and which methodology he used. We will then emphasize one of the three pieces of evidence quot- ed by the authors, the evidence of the Greek manuscripts as de- scribed in their tables of variants.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 30, Number 2 Fall 2019
    Volume 30, Number 2 Fall 2019 Are the Canonical Gospels to Be Identified as a Genre of Greco-Roman Biography? The Early Church Fathers Say ‘No.’ F. DAVID FARNELL Job’s Eschatological Hope: The Implications of Job’s Redeemer for Social Justice JAMIE BISSMEYER And How Shall They Hear Without a Preacher? A Biblical Theology of Romans 9–11 GREGORY H. HARRIS A Dynamic Relationship: Christ, the Covenants, and Israel CORY M. MARSH Romans 7: An Old Covenant Struggle Seen through New Covenant Eyes JAY STREET The Reformation’s “Macedonian Call” to Africa—the Long Way Around DAVID BEAKLEY AND JOHANN ODENDAAL Implication and Application in Exposition, Part 2: Principles for Contemporary Application CARL A. HARGROVE TMS.edu Volume 30 Fall 2019 Number 2 The Master’s Seminary Journal CONTENTS Editorial ................................................................................................................. 181-83 Nathan Busenitz Are the Canonical Gospels to Be Identified as a Genre of Greco-Roman Biography? The Early Church Fathers Say ‘No.’ ............................................... 185-206 F.David Farnell Job’s Eschatological Hope: The Implications of Job’s Redeemer for Social Justice .......................................................................................................... 207-26 Jamie Bissmeyer And How Shall They Hear Without a Preacher? A Biblical Theology of Romans 9–11 .................................................................................................... 227-55 Gregory H. Harris A Dynamic Relationship:
    [Show full text]
  • University of Birmingham Electronic Transcriptions of New Testament
    University of Birmingham Electronic transcriptions of new testament manuscripts and their accuracy, documentation and publication Houghton, H.A.G. DOI: 10.1163/9789004399297_009 License: Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (Harvard): Houghton, HAG 2019, Electronic transcriptions of new testament manuscripts and their accuracy, documentation and publication. in C Clivaz, D Hamidovi & S Savant (eds), Ancient Manuscripts in Digital Culture: Visualisation, Data Mining, Communication . vol. 3, Digital Biblical Studies, vol. 3, Brill, Leiden, pp. 133- 153. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004399297_009 Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: Checked for eligibility: 30/05/2019 Houghton, H..G. (2019). "Electronic Transcriptions of New Testament Manuscripts and their Accuracy, Documentation and Publication". In Ancient Manuscripts in Digital Culture. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004399297_009 https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004399297/BP000008.xml General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain.
    [Show full text]
  • Regalitatea Lui Dumnezeu N Viziunea Autorilor Psalmilor
    [Plērōma anul IX nr. 1 (2007) 5-34] IUNIA ŞI NIMFA – AVATARURILE UNOR IDENTITĂŢI FEMININE ÎN MANUSCRISELE GRECEŞTI, RESPECTIV TRADUCERILE ROMÂNEŞTI ALE NOULUI TESTAMENT prep. univ. drd. Emanuel Conţac Abstract The process of copying and translating the New Testament across the ages is sometimes bound to be affected by certain cultural predispositions of the scribes. Two passages where such tendencies can be identified are Romans 16:7 and Colossians 4:15, where two feminine names (Junia and Nympha, respectively) are understood as male names. The supposedly male identities are found in numerous manuscripts of the NT and in the vast majority of the Romanian NT translations, as shown by the present study. Introducere Odată cu ascensiunea studiilor feministe şi de gen, problematica identităţii feminine a început să facă obiectul unor cercetări intense în mai toate disciplinele umaniste sau înrudite cu acestea. Evident, nici domeniul studiilor biblice (Biblical Studies) nu a rămas neinfluenţat de noile tendinţe. Gama abordărilor este impresionantă, de la cele radicale, care denunţă vehement teologia tradiţională ca pe o emanaţie a culturii patriarhale şi misogine, propunând transformarea din temelii a establishmentului religios, 6 Emanuel Conţac până la cele care caută mai degrabă o reajustare a discursului teologic contemporan al Bisericii în lumina noilor cercetări, fără a-şi fi propus o revoluţionare a praxisului religios în sine. Dintre chestiunile puse pe tapet în perioada ultimelor decenii se detaşează cea privitoare la statutul femeilor în creştinismul timpuriu. Studii feministe recente afirmă ritos că, în zorii creştinismului, femeile slujeau alături de bărbaţi în funcţia de prezbiter, ba chiar şi de episcop.1 Alţi cercetători merg mai departe, considerând că a existat chiar şi o femeie printre apostoli – Iunia, menţionată în Epistola apostolului Pavel către Romani, 16:7.
    [Show full text]
  • Miracle and Mission. the Authentication of Missionaries and Their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark
    Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament • 2. Reihe Herausgegeben von Martin Hengel und Otfried Hofius 112 ARTI BUS James A. Kelhoffer Miracle and Mission The Authentication of Missionaries and Their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark Mohr Siebeck JAMES A. KELHOFFER, born 1970; 1991 B.A. Wheaton College (IL); 1992 M.A. Wheaton Grad- uate School (IL); 1996 M.A. University of Chicago; 1999 Ph.D. University of Chicago; 1999- 2000 Visiting Assistant Professor of New Testament at the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago. Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Kelhoffer, James A.: Miracle and mission : the authentication of missionaries and their message in the longer ending of Mark / James A. Kelhoffer. - Tübingen : Mohr Siebeck, 2000 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament: Reihe 2 ; 112) ISBN 3-16-147243-8 © 2000 by J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), P.O. Box 2040, D-72010 Tübingen. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. The applies particularly to repro- ductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Guide-Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper from Papierfabrik Nie- fern and bound by Heinr. Koch in Tübingen. Printed in Germany. ISSN 0340-9570 To my grandparents: Elsie Krath Alberich Anthony Henry Alberich Lillian Jay Kelhoffer f Herbert Frank Kelhoffer, Sr. Magnum opus et adruum, sed Deus adiutor noster est. (Augustine, de civ. D. Preface) Acknowledgments This book is a revision of my doctoral dissertation, "The Authentication of Missionaries and their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20)," written under the supervision of Adela Yarbro Collins at the University of Chicago and defended on December 9,1998.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Textuai History of Hebrews
    Mapping the Textuai History of Hebrews Timothy Jolm FINNEY Abstract. 'Ille Illultivariate technique of c1assical scaling is applied to the textual tradition of the New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews. TIIe resultant maps ma)' he interprcted as representÎng the tex tuaI developmcnt of the Epistle in lime, and, perhaps, space. TIle data matrices trom which the maps arc produced have a high inherent dimensionality, 50 the mars arc limited in their ability to convey the textual situation sufficiently. Comparison with a set of critical principles suggcsts that the lexIs of P46 and Codex Vaticanlls are the Illost primitive among the ex tant witnesses. Résumé. La technique ,multivariée de l'analyse hiérarchique classique est appliquée à la tradition textuelle de l'Epître aux Hébreux du Nouveau Testament. Les graphiques qui en découlent peuvent être considérées comme représentant le développement textuel de l'Épître dans le temps ct, peut~être, l'espace. Les matrices de données ayant scrvi à produire ces graphiques présentent une dimensionalité inhérente élevée, ce qui limite leur capacité à exprimcr de façon fiable la situation textuelle. Une comparaison à un ensemble de principes critiques permet dc penser que les textes de P46 et du Codex lfalicalills sont les plus anciens. Keyword.s: Classical scaling, multivariate l'I-lots·c1és : Analyse hiérarchique classique, analysis, textual criticism, Epistle ta the analyse multivariée, critique textuelle, Épître Hebrews, New Testament. aux hébreux, Nouveau Testament. 1. Introduction 111e New Testament is supported by a rich and diverse textual tradi­ tion. Besides thousands of extant manuseripts in its original Greek lan­ guage, there are tens of thousands of other witnesses induding quotations ~ Daptist TIleological College of Western Australia; 20, Hayman Road; Dentley, \VA 6102; Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • A Textual Commentary on the Greek Received Text of the New Testament, Volume 2 (Matthew 15-20), 2009
    i A TEXTUAL COMMENTARY ON THE GREEK RECEIVED TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Being the Greek Text used in the AUTHORIZED VERSION also known as the KING JAMES VERSION also known as the AUTHORIZED (KING JAMES) VERSION also known as the KING JAMES BIBLE also known as the SAINT JAMES VERSION by Gavin Basil McGrath B.A., LL.B. (Sydney University), Dip. Ed. (University of Western Sydney), Dip. Bib. Studies (Moore Theological College). Formerly of St. Paul’s College, Sydney University. Textual Commentary, Volume: 2 St. Matthew’s Gospel Chapters 15-20. Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum “The Word of the Lord Endureth Forever” (I Peter 1:25). ii McGrath, Gavin (Gavin Basil), b. 1960. A Textual Commentary on the Greek Received Text of the New Testament, Volume 2 (Matthew 15-20), 2009. Available on the internet http://www.gavinmcgrathbooks.com . Published & Printed in Sydney, New South Wales. Copyright © 2009 by Gavin Basil McGrath. P.O. Box 834, Nowra, N.S.W., 2541, Australia. Dedication Sermon, preached at Mangrove Mountain Union Church, Mangrove Mountain, N.S.W., 2250, Australia, on Thursday 5 November, 2009. Oral recorded form presently available at http://www.sermonaudio.com/kingjamesbible . This copy of Volume 2 (Matt. 15-20) incorporates corrigenda changes from Appendix 6 of the Revised Volume 1 (Matt. 1-14) © 2010 by Gavin Basil McGrath, Appendix 6 of Volume 3 (Matt. 21-25) © 2011 by Gavin Basil McGrath; Appendix 6 of Volume 4 (Matt. 26-28) © 2012 by Gavin Basil McGrath; Appendix 6 of Volume 5 (Mark 1-3) © 2015 by Gavin Basil McGrath; and Appendix 6 of Volume 6 (Mark 4 & 5) © 2016 by Gavin Basil McGrath.
    [Show full text]
  • Manuscript 2193 and Its Text of the Gospel According to John
    Concordia Seminary - Saint Louis Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary Master of Sacred Theology Thesis Concordia Seminary Scholarship 5-1-2013 Manuscript 2193 and its Text of the Gospel According to John Timothy Koch Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.csl.edu/stm Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Koch, Timothy, "Manuscript 2193 and its Text of the Gospel According to John" (2013). Master of Sacred Theology Thesis. 27. https://scholar.csl.edu/stm/27 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Concordia Seminary Scholarship at Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master of Sacred Theology Thesis by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © 2013 by Timothy A. Koch. All rights reserved. CONTENTS ILLUSTRATIONS v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi ABSTRACT vii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. MANUSCRIPT 2193 7 Description of the Manuscript 7 Abbreviations and Contractions 8 Ligatures 11 Spacing 12 Classification of 2193's Minuscule Script 12 Nomina Sacra 24 Punctuation 27 The Corrector(s) 30 3. FAMILY 1 36 Family 1 introduction 36 Kirsopp Lake and the Beginnings of the Family 1 Label 37 Current Status of Disparities of Family 1 Members 42 Inherent Problems with Family 1 Label: A Case Study of Manuscript 565 46 Manuscript 2193 and Family 1 51 4. THE TEXT OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN IN MANUSCRIPT 2193 53 Grouping manuscripts based on their texts 53 iii Family 1 Readings 56 Singular Readings 68 Other Textual Features 69 5.
    [Show full text]
  • The Significance of Split Text-Types for the Recovery of the Original Text of the Greek New Testament
    THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SPLIT TEXT-TYPES FOR THE RECOVERY OF THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT LESLIE McFALL* The significance of splits in text-types has been overlooked in Majority text (hereafter MT) studies. It will be shown in this paper that when any text-type splits, one party to the split will retain the reading of the Majority text (MT), at the place where the other party diverges from it. List 1 was the key research that led to this paper. It gives every instance in the Gospel of Matthew where the unsplit Caesarean text-type is different from the Majority text. The Caesarean text is made up of two families of manuscripts, Family 1 and Family 13. List 1 is a register of 176 differences which gives us the earliest state of the Caesarean text in Matthew before the split occurred.1 It so happens that the Egyptian text fully agrees with the Caesarean text in these 176 differences.2 Given that the Egyptian text-type (as represented by the Aleph-B text) differs from the Byzantine text (as represented by von Soden’s Koine text and Robinson-Pierpont’s text), and that the Caesarean text agrees fully with the Egyptian in List 1, it would appear from this list, taken on its own, that the Caesarean text is a strong supporter of the Egyptian text. However, this would be a misleading conclusion to draw from this one list. Elsewhere, the united Caesarean text agrees with the Byzantine text in opposition to the Egyptian text-type, 1,629 times, in the Gospel of Matthew, showing just how close the Caesarean text was, and is, to the Byzantine text.3 * Leslie McFall resides at 25 Hillfield Road, Comberton, Cambridgeshire, England CB23 7DB.
    [Show full text]