Should Matthew
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- In today's livestream, we'll be taking a look at the textual variant surrounding Matthew 23:14. This passage is found in the Textus Receptus, and the Byzantine Text but is not found in the modern Critical Editions. This means, we only have it in the KJV, NKJV and the MEV, but the rest of the Modern English Version, or Modern English Bible Translations do not contain it, relegate it to the footnotes, or put square brackets around it to question its authenticity.
#textualcriticism #byzantinetext #TextusReceptus
The longer reading is to be preferred.
A nice and simple rule for textual discrimination is to favour the longer reading if it is in the majority.
The critical method is troubling because it has a low view of preservation. The critical scholar assumes that the scribe is not to be trusted. But scribes are scholars, and if scholars can't be trusted then nor can the critical method.
In contrast John Tors made a vigorous defence of the majority text position in his debate with Tony Acosta, arguing that the Bible was preserved by faithful scribes. He argued that scribes would favour the original reading, and hence copying errors or even deliberate changes would not be found in the majority reading. Also that a study of scribal work showed that the most common error is that of omission. So the shorter reading is not to be preferred.
Good live stream!
Another informative presentation! FYI: The WEB and NHE include it, but place it as verse 12. And thanks for leading us to GA 019 (Codex L). The decorative omicrons in Οὐαὶ make it easy to distinguish verses. And the codex contains some interesting nomina sacra.God bless!🙋🏼♂️🙏😊📖
Its possible yet cant be proven conclusively. Thats why we have a good selection of bibles. Yiu pick the majority text and i pick the critical text . No problem..ww have Gods truth. Thank God. Praise ye Yah. But i dont want easter in my bible. Haha.
“other authorities”. hahaha that’s a very accurate statement and the reason I’m KJVO
Because it never was in the original Greek manuscripts so it wasnt deleted , it was added. The majority text is a comflated text.. If its in your Bible, fine. I use the NET bible and it contains all of Gods truth, teachings, parables, history, narratives, laws etc.
There are early church leaders that existed before said original manuscripts who quoted from other verses and phrases not in said original manuscript. How is that possible?
This verse is not in 01 and 03, so it is not Alexandrian/neutral. This verse is not in 05, so it is not Western. On Hort's model of a dependent Byzantine text or any other that does not treat the Byzantine text as independent, where did these words come from? It is first in 032. 02 is not extant here. Can we accept that the Church/some scribe created extra words of Jesus?
So sorry I missed the live stream. I’m not comfortable removing verses from the Bible.
What about adding verses?