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.