Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

24

Your question doesn't break it down this way, but there are really three separate issues at stake here. What does the Gospel of Barnabas claim about Christ? The most significant claim relevant to Christianity is that Christ wasn't crucified. Instead, according to the Gospel of Barnabas, Judas took his place. Obviously if this were to be verified as a true ...


13

This is a textual issue. That is, some manuscripts have the words and fasting while others don’t. The NA28 includes the text similar to the GNT you quote: . . . τοῦτο τὸ γένος ἐν οὐδενὶ δύναται ἐξελθεῖν εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ (NA28) . . . this kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer (ESV) The apparatus notes the variant you ask about (the ...


12

There are no important textual variations here: all our manuscripts include this parenthetical. There's no manuscript evidence whatsoever that this is a later insertion. (See this list of textual variants as well as the lack of any variants listed at the NET bible.) Thus we can be completely certain that the head of the manuscript tradition (that is the ...


11

This is not a question of textual criticism, nor is there any reason to reject the authenticity of Mark 7:19. It is entirely a question of interpreting the text. Let us look at the oldest versions: The Greek original has: οτι ουκ εισπορευεται αυτου εις την καρδιαν αλλ εις την κοιλιαν και εις τον αφεδρωνα εκπορευεται καθαριζων παντα τα βρωματα The ...


10

Manuscript support Both readings have early manuscript support The reading μυστήριον (mystery) finds early support in P46vid? א* A C 88 436 itr, 61 syrp copbo Hippolytus Ambrosiaster Ephraem Ambrose Pelagius Augustine Antiochus.1 UBS3 cites P46vid? in support of μυστήριον however the question mark follows "vid" because the editors were not sure of the ...


9

The position in the question, that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is not original to Matthew 28:19 is held today by very few scholars. Those that do point to a quotation from the early church historian Eusebius. In Demonstratio 3.6, he replaces "name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" with "my name." This is then taken as a direct quote from the copy of ...


9

The Gospel of Thomas Logion 114 is fairly controversial and (like many questions on BH.SE, it seems) has generated a healthy specialist bibliography.1 The translation alone is disputed (or at least discussed!); the one provided by OP is that of Thomas Lambdin (a very fine scholar). OP: What reasons are there to think that it is or is not an addition? ...


9

A Plausible Majority Text Argument Susan's answer has correctly given the direct answer to your question when she states: This is a textual issue. That is, some manuscripts have the words and fasting while others don’t. That is the simple fact. Which manuscript tradition the particular translation in question is following determines the omission or ...


9

The Idea in Brief Before the appearance of the Masoretic Text in the Tenth Century, at least three early witnesses attest to the forty day period in Jonah: the Dead Sea Scrolls at both Wadi Murabba'at and at the so-called "Cave of Horrors" in Nahal Hever, which both date to the First Century; and, thirdly, the Targum Jonathan, which dates to the Second to ...


8

Another addendum to Susan's fine answer and ScottS's alternative account. All manuscripts are not the same, which is why the text critic's job is not simply that of counting noses. We have two possible scenarios an original shorter reading, which was subsequently expanded in transmission by the addition of "+ and fasting" after "prayer"; an original ...


6

Indisputable? I agree with Frank Luke's comment, further adding that using such a term does technically make the question unanswerable (because, as Frank noted, people dispute things that ought not be). Probable Testimony Circa 60-70 A.D. The earliest probable reference to Luke's gospel is by the apostle Paul himself in 1 Tim 5:18, circa mid 60's A.D. ...


6

Analysis of Sinaiticus (yes, א is the symbol) has led to the conclusion that there are three general periods of additional editing. So the symbols represent information about these periods. Per the NA28 Introductory material on the critical apparatus: א by itself means the only reading present. א* Is a notation for the original reading when a later ...


6

First of all this is not a contest between the text of Erasmus (TR, ς) and the modern critical text. The manuscript evidence for the plural and singular forms of the pronoun is very evenly divided. The committee for the third edition of the UBS-GNT assigned the adopted reading (αυτων plural) a grade of C (A-D grades) which isn’t a great deal of confidence. ...


6

Hebrews 7:1-3: For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Without father, without mother, without ...


5

The textual variants are ἰδὼν and εἰδώς. According to Tischendorf, ἰδών is the well attested variant. ἰδών is a participle declined in the aorist tense, active voice, nominative case, masculine gender, and singular number. It is derived from the aorist tense verb εἶδον. εἰδώς is a participle declined in the perfect tense, active voice, nominative case, ...


5

You're not alone in having noticed this repetition. Various hypotheses have been proposed for its existence, from those suggesting it is a thematic choice by the narrator to highlight Elijah's change in character, to a more critical position that there was an intentional addition (perhaps from an alternate tradition of the same story). While in the process ...


5

The authenticity of the Johannine comma, found in1 John 5:7, has been a subject of debate from the early sixteenth century. Wikipedia says the general consensus today is that that passage is a Latin corruption that entered the Greek manuscript tradition in subsequent copies. Manuscript evidence can be found here, in Wikipedia. The text including the comma ...


4

After reading through the few books I have on the Apocryphal Gospels, I was unable to find any direct evidence for logion 114 being a later addition. I also am unaware of any Greek fragments of 114, so as far as I know, we only have this in the Coptic text. The closest Greek fragment is logion 77, so we cannot say for sure it is not in the Greek text. The ...


4

The Textual Witnesses "Joseph" is found in some translations because the Greek word for Joseph (Ἰωσὴφ), is found in the majority of extant manuscripts. The majority text reading is reflected in the "RP Byzantine Majority Text," the two "Textus Receptus," and the "Greek Orthodox" renderings shown in parallel at Biblehub. Verse 33 is this ("Joseph" bolded): ...


3

Manuscript Evidence As far as manuscript evidence goes, Metzger offers the following: πύθωνα appears in P74 א A B C* D* 81 326 1837 vg arm πύθωνος appears in P45 C3 D2 E H L P most minuscules it syr He prefers πύθωνα on what he sees as the harder reading.1 Translation and Meaning Fitzmyer renders the former, being in the accusative, literally as "a ...


3

There are so many similarities between the stories of Lazarus in Luke and John that you are right to recognise that there is evidence of copying. The usual scholarly position is that the story in Luke is original to Luke and that the author of John was inspired by this parable and by the Lukan story of Mary and Martha. Even if the name 'Lazarus' were a ...


3

The problem occurs in v. 10 as well, where variant readings between "Amos" and "Amon" occur. That is, like "Asaph" and "Asa," the words are near homonyms with the respective psalmist Asaph and prophet Amos. In this regard, the late Bruce Metzger (1994) comments as follows on these verses: 1:7–8 Ἀσάφ, Ἀσάφ {B} It is clear that the name ...


3

The translation discrepancy can be boiled down to different readings of the Greek words καυχησωμαι, “I may boast”, and καυθησομαι, “I may be burned.” Kevin Brown wrote a well-cited textual criticism on this topic. Here is the conclusion that he came to: There is no obvious answer to this textual dilemma in 1 Cor. 13:3 as both the external and internal ...


3

The verse appears as follows in the Masoretic Text. Ecclesiastes 7:27 (MT) 27 רְאֵה זֶה מָצָאתִי אָמְרָה קֹהֶלֶת אַחַת לְאַחַת לִמְצֹא חֶשְׁבֹּֽון׃ The word קֹהֶלֶת is the same grammatical form as the feminine singular qal active participle, which is based on the triliteral root קָהַל, which means to assemble or call together (people or sayings). ...


3

From the NET footnotes: 55 tc A few MSS (𝔓115 C, along with a few MSS known to Irenaeus {and two minuscule MSS, 5 and 11, no longer extant}), read 616 here, and several other witnesses have other variations. Irenaeus’ mention of MSS that have 616 is balanced by his rejection of such witnesses in this case. As intriguing as the reading 616 is (since the ...


3

Susan asked: Is the answer to the above different if we’re talking about variations for which there is manuscript support (DSS, Samaritan Pentateuch, ancient translations) or emendations that are purely conjectural? Yes, the answer is very different. A conjecture is not a lectio. A reading attested in a manuscript is by definition intrinsically ...


3

The very short answer is: "no". For the Greek Septuagint see NETS; for the Aramaic Targumim see the Aramaic Bible series; for the Hebrew Masoretic Text, any reliable public translation will do. These textual traditions are sufficiently distinct that it would not make sense to have an amalgamated edition (which is what I take it is meant by "all combined ...


3

I did a little google search and found that there is also a mention of a Jozabad in 1 Chronicles 12:4 and it appears that this is one of the Benjamite archers who joined David at Ziklag and in 1 Chronicles 12:20 it(my source) only gives a definition for one of them (I assume the other Jozabad), a chief of the tribe of Manasseh. I looked at other versions ...


2

The word θεός occurs 159 times in the dative singular in the Greek New Testament (NA28). In all cases with the anarthrous construct (no occurrence of the definite article), the reference is not to "a god" but is instead in reference to the creator of the heavens and earth. In other words, there appears no references to "a god" in the Greek New Testament, ...


2

Evidence against inclusion Codex Sinaiticus is the earliest manuscript with a complete copy of Mark's Gospel, although even it only dates from the fourth century. Sinaiticus and some other important manuscripts do not include "Son of God." Christian authors up to the fourth century, including Origen, Epiphanius, and Victorinus quote Mark 1:1 without “son ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible