Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
$5.00
EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 180+ books. Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).
Major Critical Texts of the New Testament
Byz RP: 2005 Byzantine Greek New Testament, Robinson & Pierpont TR1550: 1550 Stephanus New Testament Maj: The Majority Text (thousands of minuscules which display a similar text) Gries: 1774-1775 Johann Jakob Griesbach Greek New Testament Treg: 1857-1879 Samuel Prideaux Tregelles Greek New Testament Tisch: 1872 Tischendorf’s Greek New Testament WH: 1881 Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament NA28: 2012 Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament UBS5: 2014 Greek New Testament NU: Both Nestle-Aland and the United Bible Society SBLGNT: 2010 Greek New Testament THGNT: 2017 The Greek New Testament by Tyndale House GENTI: 2020 Greek-English New Testament Interlinear
[BRD] Matthew 2:18 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
18 “A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and she refused to be comforted, because they are no more.”[30]
[BRD] ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 2:18GENTI: 2020 Greek-English New Testament Interlinear
WH NU κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὀδυρμὸς πολύς “weeping and great mourning” א B Z 0250 f1
Matthew 2:18King James Version (KJV)
18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.
ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 2:18Stephanus New Testament (TR1550)
variant/TR θρηνος και κλαυθμος και οδυρμος πολυς “lamentation and weeping and great mourning” C D L W 0233 f13 33 Maj
The original reading κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὀδυρμὸς πολύς (weeping and great mourning) is found in the earliest and weightiest manuscripts א B and Z 0250 f1. In an attempt to conform Matthew’s writing to the Septuagint (Jer. 31:15; LXX 38:15), the scribes expanded it to read, θρηνος και κλαυθμος και οδυρμος πολυς (lamentation and weeping and great mourning) C D L W 0233 f13 33 Maj, which is how we get our reading in the Majority Text, and the Textus Receptus and the King James Version. In the fourth century, Emperor Constantine the Great legalized Christianity, which gave the Christians the freedom, out in the open, to compare manuscripts. When manuscripts from different regions were compared, the differences were noticed, so there was a concerted effort by some in the fourth century and thereafter to create a standard text by making changes in the exemplars and those that they copied, which also included a harmonization of the Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament with the Greek Septuagint. These changes were not carried out in some organized fashion, as there was no attempt to follow certain standards or principles. Since Constantinople was the center of the Greek-speaking church, preference was often given to their readings. This went on for a few centuries until they ended up with the Byzantine text, the readings typical of Constantinople as the standard text, while texts from other regions were set aside.
Philip W. Comfort writes,
Because Matthew’s rendition of Jer 31:15 (38:15 in the LXX) differs significantly from the Septuagint, various scribes wanted to conform Matthew’s rendition to the Septuagint. One way to do this was to add θρηνος και (“weeping and”). Such alterations were common in the fourth century (and thereafter), when scribes tended to produce a standardized text by harmonizing OT quotations in the NT with the Greek OT.—Philip W. Comfort, New Testament Text and Translation Commentary: Commentary on the Variant Readings of the Ancient New Testament Manuscripts and How They Relate to the Major English Translations (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2008), 5.
Roger L. Omanson and Bruce Manning Metzger wrote,
The longer reading, θρῆνος καὶ κλαυθμός (a song of grief and wailing), appears to be a scribal addition in order to make the wording agree more closely with the Septuagint text of Jer 31:15 (which is 38:15 in the Greek text). This longer reading is in the Textus Receptus and lies behind the rendering of the AV, “lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning.” —Roger L. Omanson and Bruce Manning Metzger, A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament: An Adaptation of Bruce M. Metzger’s Textual Commentary for the Needs of Translators (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006), 4.
Excursion Review
Lucian of Antioch (c. 240-312 C.E.), a Christian presbyter (minister), theologian, and martyr, produced the Syrian text, which was renamed the Byzantine text. About 290 C.E., some of his associates made various subsequent alterations, which deliberately combined elements from earlier types of text, and this text was adopted about 380 C.E. At Constantinople, it became the predominant form of the New Testament throughout the Greek-speaking world. The text was also edited, with harmonized parallel accounts, grammar corrections, and abrupt transitions modified to produce a smooth text. This was not a faithfully accurate copy. As we had just learned earlier under the corruption period, after Constantine legalized Christianity, giving it equal status with the pagan religions, it was much easier for those possessing manuscripts to have them copied. In fact, Constantine had ordered 50 copies of the whole of the Bible for the church in Constantinople. Over the next four centuries or so, the Byzantine Empire and the Greek-speaking church were the dominant factors as to why this area saw their text becoming the standard. It had nothing to do with it being the better text, i.e., the text that more accurately reflected the original. From the eighth century forward, the corrupt Byzantine text was the standard text and had displaced all others; it makes up about 95 percent of all manuscripts that we have of the Christian Greek Scriptures.
Textual Insights
Variant Reading(s): differing versions of a word or phrase found in two or more manuscripts within a variation unit (see below). Variant readings are also called alternate readings.
Variation Unit: any portion of text that exhibits variations in its reading between two or more different manuscripts. It is important to distinguish variation units from variant readings. Variation units are the places in the text where manuscripts disagree, and each variation unit has at least two variant readings. Setting the limits and range of a variation unit is sometimes difficult or even controversial because some variant readings affect others nearby. Such variations may be considered individually or as elements of a single reading. One should also note that the terms “manuscript” and “witness” may appear to be used interchangeably in this context. Strictly speaking, “witness” (see below) will only refer to the content of a given manuscript or fragment, which it predates to a greater or lesser extent. However, the only way to reference the “witness” is by referring to the manuscript or fragment that contains it. In this book, we have sometimes used the terminology “witness of x or y manuscript” to distinguish the content in this way.
TERMS AS TO HOW WE SHOULD OBJECTIVELY VIEW THE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY FOR THE READING ACCEPTED AS THE ORIGINAL
The modal verbs are might have been (30%), may have been (40%), could have been(55%), would have been (80%),must have been (95%), which are used to show that we believe the originality of a reading is certain, probable or possible.
The letter [WP] stands for Weak Possibility (30%), which indicates that this is a low-level proof that the reading might have been original in that it is enough evidence to accept that the variant might have been possible, but it is improbable. We can say the reading might have been original, as there is some evidence that is derived from manuscripts that carry very little weight, early versions, or patristic quotations.
The letter [P] stands for Plausible (40%), which indicates that this is a low-level proof that the reading may have been original in that it is enough to accept a variant to be original and we have enough evidence for our belief. The reading may have been original but it is not probably so.
The letter [PE] stands for Preponderance of Evidence (55%), which indicates that this is a higher-level proof that the reading could have been original in that it is enough to accept as such unless another reading emerges as more probable.
The letter [CE] stands for Convincing Evidence (80%), which indicates that the evidence is an even higher-level proof that the reading surely was the original in that the evidence is enough to accept it as substantially certainunless proven otherwise.
The letter [BRD] stands for Beyond Reasonable Doubt (95%), which indicates that this is the highest level of proof: the reading must have been original in that there is no reason to doubt it. It must be understood that feeling as though we have no reason to doubt is not the same as one hundred percent absolute certainty.
NOTE: This system is borrowed from the criminal just legal terms of the United States of America, the level of certainty involved in the use of modal verbs, and Bruce Metzger in his A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), who borrowed his system from Johann Albrecht Bengel in his edition of the Greek New Testament (Tübingen, 1734). In addition, the percentages are in no way attempting to be explicit, but rather, they are nothing more than a tool to give the non-textual scholar a sense of the degree of certainty. However, this does not mean the percentages are not reflective of certainty.
Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006)
Bruce Manning Metzger, United Bible Societies, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th Rev. Ed.) (London; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994),
Eberhard Nestle and Erwin Nestle, Nestle-Aland: NTG Apparatus Criticus, ed. Barbara Aland et al., 28. revidierte Auflage. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012).
Dirk Jongkind, ed., The Greek New Testament: Apparatus (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017).
Eberhard Nestle and Erwin Nestle, Nestle-Aland: Novum Testamentum Graece, ed. Barbara Aland et al., 28. revidierte Auflage. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012)
The modal verbs are might have been (30%), may have been (40%), could have been (55%), would have been (80%), must have been (95%), which are used to show that we believe the originality of a reading is certain, probable or possible.
The letter [CE] stands for Convincing Evidence (80%), which indicates that the evidence is an even higher-level proof that the reading surely was the original in that the evidence is enough to accept it as substantially certain unless proven otherwise.
Leave a Reply