Discover the nuances of textual variation in Matthew 1:25. This article evaluates the differences in early manuscripts, weighing the evidence for each reading. By exploring the theological implications of these variations, it sheds light on understanding Mary’s virginity in the context of early Christian beliefs and scriptural interpretation. Join us in a detailed journey through biblical scholarship and theological reflection.

Introduction

The passage of Matthew 1:25 presents a notable textual variation that is central to understanding the nuances of the scriptural narrative. The task of textual criticism, particularly within the New Testament, involves discerning the most authentic rendering of a text. This process is pivotal in passages like Matthew 1:25, where theological implications are significant.

Manuscript Evidence and Analysis

Textual Variants Overview

1. Westcott-Hort (WH) and Nestle-Aland/United Bible Societies (NU) Reading:

   • Greek: ἔτεκεν υἱόν (eteken huion)
   • Translation: “she gave birth to a son”
   • Manuscript Support: Codex Sinaiticus (א), Codex Vaticanus (B), Codex Z, 071, Family 1, 33

2. Textus Receptus (TR) Variant:

   • Greek: ετεκεν τον υιον αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον (eteken ton huion autes ton prototokon)
   • Translation: “she gave birth to her firstborn son”
   • Manuscript Support: Codices C, D, L, W, 087, Majority Text

External Evidence

The WH/NU reading is undergirded by some of the oldest and most reliable manuscripts, such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. These manuscripts are seminal in the Alexandrian text-type, often considered closer to the original writings due to their earlier dating and textual quality.

The TR variant, with broader manuscript support from later texts, suggests an alignment or harmonization with Luke 2:7. This tendency to align parallel accounts in the Gospels is a known scribal practice, especially in later manuscript traditions.

Internal Evidence and Contextual Considerations

Considering the theological implications of the term “firstborn” (πρωτότοκον, prototokon), its absence in earlier manuscripts is noteworthy. The argument that its omission was a deliberate act to support the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity is not consistent across manuscripts, especially in parallel accounts like Luke 2:7. The consistency of “firstborn” in Luke across almost all manuscripts, including those omitting it in Matthew, suggests that its inclusion in Matthew 1:25 in later manuscripts is more likely a result of harmonization with Luke rather than theological motivation.

Conclusion

The evidence, both external and internal, suggests that the original wording of Matthew 1:25 was likely “ἔτεκεν υἱόν” (eteken huion), “she gave birth to a son,” as found in the WH/NU texts. This reading is supported by the earliest and most reliable manuscripts. The longer reading in the TR variant appears to be a later addition, influenced by the desire to harmonize Matthew’s account with that of Luke. This conclusion is in line with a documentary approach that prioritizes early and reliable manuscript evidence, while also considering the historical and theological context of the textual variations.v

About the Author

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION