Matt 5:1 προσηλθον

There is little reason to follow the primarily Egyptian orthographical preference of the few manuscripts that read προσηλθαν (ℵ* B* pc), just as Weiss (85) writes regarding ηλθον in its simple and compound forms, that "the ending in -αν is found only 9 times in B, sporadically in ℵ, D, L, only 6 times where 2 of them agree and 2 times where all three agree, so it is very improbable that this writing convention goes back to the most ancient text.” See also Matt 2:5 ειπον and Matt 7:13 εισελθετε.

Matt 4:23 περιηγεν ολην την Γαλιλαιαν ο Ιησους

In one of many places where the text of NA27/UBS4 relies on but a single Greek manuscript, the expression found in most witnesses seemed peculiar to some who thought to simplify it in various ways: περιηγεν ο Ιησους ολην την Γαλιλαιαν (ℵ1 D f1 33 892 1424 l 844 l 2211 pc lat; Eus); περιηγεν ο Ιησους εν ολη τη Γαλιλαια ([ℵ*] C* sy-s.p.h bo); περιηγεν εν ολη τη Γαλιλαια (B [k] sy-c sa mae1). Bloomfield (GNT, 1:26; Annotations, 4) suggests that critics "stumbled at the construction with accus[ative] . . . from their not being aware that the accus[ative] is governed by the prepos[ition] in composition, and accordingly supplied εν," at the same time changing the following words to conform to εν with the dative. Burgon (Causes, 51–2) astutely suggests that the -εν of περιηγεν was carelessly reduplicated and consequently brought about the phrase's change to the dative case. The same could have happened if -εν itself was accidentally mistaken for the preposition (resulting in περιηγ εν ολη etc.), and then -εν added by a subsequent scribe to repair what appeared to be an obvious homoeoteleuton error. Yet, as in 9:35 and 23:15, Matthew's custom is simply περιαγω + the accusative (without a preposition). The transposition of ο Ιησους from its original position to its more common place just following the verb was only natural, especially as such is the position in an extremely similar verse at 9:35 (so Burgon, who incidentally also notes the addition of ο Ιησους by ℵ after περιηγεν in that passage's parallel place of Mark 6:6). Cf. also John 7:28 where a nearly identical variation occurs: the consensus reading, εκραξεν ουν εν τω ιερω διδασκων ο Ιησους, is altered to (1) εκραξεν ουν ο Ιησους εν τω ιερω διδασκων (ℵ D N Ψ f1 565 l 844 l 2211 it), and (2) εκραξεν ουν εν τω ιερω διδασκων (i.e., without ο Ιησους) (Δ f13 al). It is highly unlikely that so many witnesses would have altered the position of ο Ιησους from its normal Koine position behind the verb to the place where it rests in most manuscripts, if the former were indeed its original location. The omission of ο Ιησους, as occurs in a few manuscripts in John 7:28, is characteristic of a minority of manuscripts anywhere in the manuscript tradition given the proclivity of early scribes to omit more than to add. Yet here the omission in a single Greek witness may also have been aided by scribal harmonization to Mark 1:39 and Luke 4:44, where the proper name is absent.

Text und Textwert #10 results:

1    περιηγεν ολην την γαλιλαιαν ο ιησους
07 017 021 028 030 031 032 036 037 041 042 045 047 055 0211 0287 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 34 35 37 38 39 40S 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 63 64 65 66 67 68 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 80 83 84 86 89 90 98 99 100 105 106 107 108 109 111 112 113 114 116 117 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 131 132 133 134 135S 136 137 138 140 141 142 143 144 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 155 156 158 160 161 162 163 164 165 167 169 170 171 173 174 175 178 179 180 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 192 193 194 195 196 198 199 200 201 202 204 207 208 210 211 212 213 215 217 218 219 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 240 244 245 246 247 248 251 259 260 261 262 263 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 274 275 276 277 278 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 303 304 305 306 310 324 329 330 331 334 343 344 345 347 348 349 350S 351 352 353 355 358 359 360 361 363 364 365 366 367 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 379 380 386 387 388 389 390 391 393 394 395 399 402 405 406 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 418 419* 420 422 431 435 438 439 440 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 461 470 471 473 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 500 501 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 513 514 515 516 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 527 528 529 530 532 534 535 537 543 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 558 560 561 563 564 565 566 568 569 571 573 574 575 577 578 579 580 581 583 584 585 586 587 588 590 592 597 600 645 649 651 652 655 657 660 662 663 666 668 672 676 677 679 680 683 685 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 696 697 699 700 703 707 708 709C 711 714 715 716 717 718 724 725 726 730 745 746 747 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 765 766 768S 769 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 785 786 787 788 789S 790 791 792 793 794S 795 796 797 798 799 801 803 804 805 806 808 809 811 818 822 824 825 826 827 828 830S 839 843 844 845 851 852 860 864 871 872 873 875 877 880 886 888 890 893 895 896 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 951 952 953 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 968 969 971 972 973 974 975 978 979 980 982 983 986 987 988 989 992 994 995 996 998 999 1000 1001 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1017 1018 1019 1020 1023 1024 1025 1026 1030 1032 1033 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042S 1044 1046 1048 1050 1052 1053 1054S 1056 1057 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1068 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1095 1096 1097 1110 1111 1113 1114 1117 1118 1120 1121 1122 1123 1125 1126 1127 1131 1132 1133 1135 1136 1138 1144 1145 1146 1148 1149 1152 1155 1158 1160 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1178 1179 1180 1181 1185 1186 1187 1188C 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200S 1202 1203 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1247 1248 1250 1251 1253 1260 1262 1266 1269 1273 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1285 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1294 1296 1297 1298 1299 1301 1303 1305 1309 1310S 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1328 1329 1330 1331 1333 1334 1335 1338 1339 1340 1341 1345 1346 1347 1350 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1358 1359 1362 1364 1365 1367 1375 1377 1383 1385 1386 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1406 1408 1409 1410 1413 1414S 1415 1416 1418 1420 1422 1432 1434 1435 1436 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1452 1454 1456 1457 1458 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464S 1465 1466 1467 1468 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1505 1508 1510 1511 1519 1521 1528 1530 1531 1532 1535 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1555 1556 1558 1559 1560 1563 1570 1572 1573 1575 1576 1578 1579 1580 1581 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1591 1592 1594 1595 1597 1600 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1608 1609 1612 1615T 1617 1620 1622 1623 1624 1625 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1634 1635 1637 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1645 1646 1647 1649 1651 1652 1653 1659 1660 1661 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1670 1671 1672 1676 1678 1680 1682 1685 1686 1687 1688 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1697 1698 1699 1700 1702 1703 1712 1713 1797 1800 1802 1804 1808 1813 1814 1901 1966 2095 2097 2099 2101 2107 2109 2112 2117 2118 2120 2122 2123 2126 2127 2131 2132 2133 2135 2139 2141 2142 2146 2147 2159 2172 2173 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2181 2182 2191 2193 2195 2199 2201 2204S 2213 2215 2217 2220 2221 2223 2224 2229 2236 2238 2255 2260 2261 2263 2265 2266 2267 2273 2277 2278* 2280 2281 2283 2284 2287 2290S 2291 2292 2295 2296 2297 2301 2304 2306 2314 2317 2321 2323 2324 2328 2352 2354 2355 2356 2362 2367 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2381 2382 2383 2386 2387 2388 2394 2397 2398 2400 2404 2405 2406 2407 2411 2414 2415 2420 2422 2426 2430 2439 2442 2446 2451 2454 2458 2465 2467 2471 2472 2474 2476 2477 2478 2479 2482 2483 2487 2488 2489 2494 2496 2497 2499 2502 2503 2507 2508 2509 2510 2511 2518 2520 2521 2523 2524 2525 2528S 2530 2533 2539 2545 2546 2550 2554 2555 2557 2559S 2561 2562 2567 2571 2578 2579 2581 2590S 2591S 2592 2598 2603 2604 2605 2606 2608S 2610 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2620 2622 2623 2624 2633 2635 2636 2637 2645 2646 2650 2651S 2653 2656 2658 2660 2665 2666 2670 2673 2676 2680 2684 2685 2687 2689S 2691 2692 2694 2695 2697 2702 2703 2705 2706 2707 2708 2709 2710 2713 2714 2715 2718 2721 2724 2726 2727 2728S 2729 2730 2734 2735 2737 2745 2749 2756 2757 2760 2765 2766 2767 2770 2773 2774 2775 2779 2780 2783 2787 2788 2806 2808 2809 2810 2812 2831 2835 2836
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1347

1B    περιηγεν ολην την γαλιλαν ο ιησους
1188*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

2    περιηγεν εν ολη τη γαλιλαια
03
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

3    περιηγεν ο ιησους ολην την γαλιλαιαν
01C1 05 1 4 33 118S 130 154 157 205 209 214 220 243 273 333 346 354 392 419C 423 428 517 557 582 591 596 684 713 719 720 722 723 727 728 729 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 741 744 772S 817 819 820 833 834 835 836 837 842 854 855 856 858 861 863 878 889 891 892 949 954 970 1021 1029 1043 1047S 1137 1139 1159 1182 1252 1261 1263 1268 1272 1302 1327 1336 1387 1396 1424 1506 1533 1534 1536 1557 1582 1601 1613 1615L 1633 1675 1704 1816 1823 2148 2206 2207 2278C 2450 2452 2470 2490 2492 2577 2583 2701 2786
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 115

3B    περιηγεν ο ιησους την γαλιλαιαν
1481
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

4    περιηγεν εν ολη τη γαλιλαια ο ιησους
04C3
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

5    περιηγεν ο ιησους εν ολη τη γαλιλαια
04* 279
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 2

6    περιηγεν ο ιησους εν τη γαλιλαια
01*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

7    περιηγεν την γαλιλαιαν ολην ο ιησους
2516
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

7B    περιηγεν την γαλιλαιαν ο ιησους ολην
544
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

8    περιηγεν ολην την γαλιλαιαν
293 512 740 997 1357 1421 1453
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 7

9    περιηγεν την γαλιλαιαν ο ιησους
36 709* 1780 2585
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 4

10    περιηγεν ο ιησους
191 1455S 1590
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 3

11    περιηγεν καθ ολης της γαλιλαιας ο ιησους
1058 1204 2315 2693S
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 4

12 περιηγεν
664
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

Matt 4:16 ειδεν φως μεγα

Indicative of the atticistic alterations found elsewhere in the same major witnesses (cf., e.g., Matt 3:4 αυτου ην and Matt 4:9 ταυτα παντα σοι), a few witnesses alter the word order to φως ειδεν μεγα in an attempt to improve the style (ℵ B C W Σ f1.13 33 892 1241 it vg-pt; Or-pt Eus Chr Cyr). The normal Koine word order is intrinsically characteristic of Matthew's style, and the many more noticeable verbal dissimilarities of the passage with the LXX make harmonization to the word order there highly unlikely. The alteration was no doubt encouraged by a critical and poetic attempt to align the position of φως here with the position of φως later in the verse (φως ειδεν μεγα . . . φως ανετειλεν αυτοις). Furthermore, the word order found in most witnesses is early and diverse (D E K L M P S U V Γ Δ k vg-pt; Hipp Or-pt).

Matt 4:13, 15 Νεφθαλειμ

     There is little reason to follow the orthographical preference of the few relatively minor witnesses that read Νεφθαλιμ (M V Ω 047 213 565 566 655 713 bo).

Matt 4:13 Καπερναουμ

     Some manuscripts and versions (ℵ B D W* Z 0233 33 pc lat co) show preference for the spelling Καφαρναουμ, which admittedly is more similar to the Hebrew (כפר נחום). Matthäi (56) claims that Origen imported Καφαρναουμ into the text, and that Jerome followed Origen; furthermore: "Each changed particular names elsewhere according to his own judgment." This particular spelling variation may date to the very origin of the major text-types or early editions of the New Testament, since the same variation occurs everywhere (Matt 8:5; 11:23; 17:24; Mark 1:21; 2:1; 9:33; Luke 4:23, 31; 7:1; 10:15; John 2:12; 4:46; 6:17, 24, 59). While it is possible that scribes would have updated the text to reflect that name more familiar to them, it is hard to account for the fact that so many manuscripts from everywhere have Καπερναουμ. Consequently, Καφαρναουμ may reflect a critical attempt to restore a more orthographically Semitic pronunciation, a change that would have occurred very early since that spelling was used by Josephus in the first century and the Latin version depends on such a spelling (Capharnaum). Subsequently, some later occurrences of Καφαρναουμ may reflect assimilation to the predominant influence of the Latin version, or to esteemed fathers (like Origen) who frequently commented on such minutiae. The reading of most manuscripts is not without significant and diverse support (including C E K L M P S U V Wc Γ Δ Σ f1.13 [Θ: Καπαρναουμ]; Eus) and therefore cannot easily be ignored.

Matt 4:13 Ναζαρετ

There is little reason to follow the primarily Egyptian orthographical preference of the few witnesses that read Ναζαρα (ℵ1 B* Z 33 k mae1; Or-pt), which was also the preference of a lone manuscript in 2:23 (P70vid). Indicative of a limited orthographical preference in conjunction with assimilation toward two popular versions (vg co), most of the manuscripts that read Ναζαρεθ here (ℵ* D E K M S U V W Θ Ω 0233 f1.13 al vg co) also read Ναζαρεθ not only in 2:23 (C K M N S W Γ Π Σ Ω 0250 f13 al lat vg [Δ f1: Ναζαραθ]) against the consensus Ναζαρετ (including ℵ B D L 33) but also in Mark 1:9 (D E F H K M U V W Θ Π f1.13 al vg co) against the consensus Ναζαρετ (including ℵ B L Γ Δ Φ a b d f; Or [Σ: Ναζαρατ]).
     Tony Pope through private email correspondence suggests the likelihood that "either it was the felt need in Greek to avoid having foreign words that end in various consonants (Greek words end only in a few possible consonants - Smyth §133), or there was a local language form of the name that influenced the orthography here." Given (1) the general unreliability of a minority of scribes in cases of orthography even in the space of two chapters, (2) the internal probability that Matthew would not have spelled "Nazareth" three different ways in as many passages (2:23; 4:13; 21:11), and (3) the chance that the spelling Ναζαρα could have come about in a minority of witnesses due to scribal attraction to the last syllable of other place names such as Ιεροσολυμα (2:1, 3; 3:5; 5:35), Ιουδα (2:6 bis), Ιουδαια (3:5), Γαλιλαια (4:15, 23), etc., in the end a preliminary preference for the majority reading Ναζαρετ is not indiscriminate.

Matt 4:12 ο Ιησους

After ακουσας δε some witnesses omit ο Ιησους (ℵ B C*vid D Z 33 543 700 pc ff1 k vg-st sy-s sa mae1 bo-pt). Mill (Prolegomena:148) says, conversely, that "a scribe's subconscious long ago introduced ο Ιησους into the text." Bengel (Apparatus, 97), Griesbach (1:39–40), Meyer (92), and others, following Mill, argue that the name was introduced either because the place marked the beginning of the pericope or because of lectionary cross-contamination due to the reading that begins with 4:12. Whitby (141) thinks the period is "defective" without ο Ιησους, but Fritzsche (176–7) supports the words not because the sense is unclear without the name, but because intrinsically it is generally Matthew's custom (cf. 4:17, 23; 8:14, 18, 33; 11:1; 12:1; 13:1, 53; 15:21, 29; 16:13; 17:1, etc.). Wettstein (1:274) argues in like manner, noting similar places (1:18, 24; 8:13, 14, 18). Matthäi (55) notes that the expression is preserved not only in all the Gospel lectionaries but also in all the manuscripts he has collated, whereas Bloomfield (GNT, 23; Annotations, 3) confirms it with little doubt but says the internal evidence is "equally balanced."
     In addition, there are several reasons for maintaining the authenticity of ο Ιησους. First, omission among the early manuscripts is more than twice as common as addition (cf. note on Matt 1:22). Second, although less likely, the omission could reflect conformation to the exact expression 30 verses earlier (2:22). Third, the omission may be accounted for by the transcription error known as homoeoarchton (ο...ο), the probability for which is increased due to the likelihood that the number of the letters of the expression written as a nomen sacrum would have equalled the number of the letters of the following word (ΟΙΣ ΟΤΙ). Fourth, if scribes were really so prone to add the name as frequently as some allege, there are many likelier places where the name should have been added but where not a single scribe has done so (cf. the beginning of arguably the most famous sermon in the Bible, the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5:1–7:29). Fifth, the claim of lectionary cross-contamination is overstated; cf. Scholz, 1:458–9, where most Greek manuscripts containing the nearby pericopes were unaffected by the beginning of lectionary readings (τω καιρω εκεινω περιπατων ο Ιησους παρα [4:18–23]; το καιρω εκεινω ηκολουθησαν τω Ιησου [4:25–5:11]; ειπεν ο κυριος τω αιτουντι [5:42–48]; ειπεν ο κυριος [7:9–18]). Sixth, due to perceived superfluousness, names are frequently omitted by a minority of manuscripts at any given place (cf., e.g., the omissions of: Ιωαννης in 3:14 (by ℵ* B sa); ο Ιησους in 4:23 (by B k sy-c sa mae); κυριε in 8:6 (by ℵ* k sy-s.c; Hil); Ιησους in 8:22 (by ℵ 33 b c k q sy-s), etc. For these internal and external reasons the presence of ο Ιησους should be considered original.

Matt 4:10 οπισω μου

This variation represents one of the many places where the Textus Receptus deviates from the broad consensus of Greek manuscripts (for inclusion of οπισω μου see below, including C2 D E L M U Z Γ Ω 047 055 0211 33 [+1345 mss] b h l* sy-[s].c.h** sa-mss bo-mss). For another relatively significant deviation of the Textus Receptus from the consensus text, cf. the note on Matt 3:11.
     A higher regard for the interpretation of the text over the text itself caused οπισω μου to be removed from in between the words υπαγε and Σατανα in a number of witnesses (ℵ B C*vid K P S V W Δ Σ 0233 f1.13 565 579* 700 892*vid [+145 mss] f k vg sy-p sa-ms mae1 bo; Ir-latvid Tert Or Hil). The same motivation may have caused orthodox scribes to remove υπαγε οπισω μου Σατανα from Luke 4:8 (ℵ B D L W Ξ f1 33 205 579 700 788 892* 2542 pc lat sy-s.p sa bo-pt), although the disruption there could have been caused by the command appearing before the end of Jesus' temptation in Luke's account.
     Wettstein (1:272–3) demonstrates, beginning with Origen, the early and widespread notion that Jesus could not have said υπαγε οπισω μου to Satan, because (so Pseudo-Ignatius) it was impossible for Satan to turn and follow him, and (so Victor) because it is a good thing to be behind Jesus, and (so Jerome) because Jesus would not censure the Apostle Peter and Satan with the same words. Jerome even interprets Matt 16:23 in such a way that has Jesus directing the word υπαγε to the Devil, namely, "Go away," and υπαγε οπισω μου to Peter, namely, "follow my way." Wettstein charges: "It appears that this emendation [i.e., omission] arose from the cleverness of Origen, who also has deleted the words οπισω μου from unwilling manuscripts at Luke 4:8." Matthäi (54–5) similarly states: "I believe that οπισω μου was removed lest it appear that Peter and the Devil received the same response," and that although Euthymius Zigabenus thinks that Matthew did not write οπισω μου but that Luke did, according "to the other Greek interpreters οπισω μου should be removed both in Matthew and in Luke." Matthäi notes the Catena to Mark 8:33 that says: "But to Satan when he was tempting Jesus he did not say, 'Go behind me, Satan,' but 'Go, Satan;' but to Peter (Mark 8:33) while he was still a sinner, and therefore not yet behind Jesus, he said, ' Go behind me, Satan,' that is, 'follow me.'" Matthäi rightly argues, "But surely, if υπαγε οπισω μου signifies nothing but ακολουθει μοι ['follow me'], by no means would Christ have spoken such to the Devil." Many scribes and interpreters reasoned similarly and thus removed the words. Wettstein also notes the ludicrousness of Jesus commanding Satan to follow him.
     Thus with good reason Griesbach (36–9) states that "the reading οπισω μου, inasmuch as it is more difficult, rougher, and more unusual, altogether must be preferred over the other, which by the omission of these words proves that some readers plucked out a scruple that was vexing to them," and that the οπισω μου is supported by "witnesses of the most diverse kind, conspiring among themselves in a friendly manner." Griesbach continues, "For we know that already Origen and Pseudo-Ignatius, whom Victor, Euthymius, Jerome, and others followed thereafter, were of this opinion, that υπαγειν οπισω τινος did not signify anything other than ακολουθειν τινι, and thus by a deliberate and judicious plan Jesus indeed said to Peter (Matt 16:23) υπαγε οπισω μου σατανα, but to the tempter υπαγε σατανα, without this addition. I voluntarily grant that the shorter reading was rather widely propagated especially due to the authority of Origen." Furthermore, Griesbach correctly states that the omission predates Origen, since Irenaeus and Tertullian do not quote the words, and thus Origen cannot be said to have created the omission, contrary to Wettstein's special pleading.
     Kühnöl (100–01) concurs that the words were deleted "by those interpreters to whom the formula υπαγω οπισω μου did not appear to signify anything other than ακολουθειν τινι, and who therefore thought that indeed Jesus rightly could say to Peter in Matt 16:23, υπαγω οπισω μου Σατανα, but not however to that insidious one." He further judges that υπαγε οπισω μου actually stands for υπαγε απ εμου και ουκετι ακολουθει οπισω μου ['depart from me and no longer follow after me'], for "never does the formula υπαγε οπισω μου signify, 'Go behind me,' but οπισω μου rather indicates 'withdrawal' or 'departure' on account of the added word υπαγειν, neither even did Jesus command Peter, as Beza advises at Mark 8:33, to follow him from behind; for he who follows us from behind certainly does not depart. The opposite formula is spoken below in verse 19: δευτε οπισω μου, 'go after/behind me,' that is, 'follow me.' And so the words υπαγε οπισω μου denote: 'depart, get out of my sight' (geh mir aus den Augen), 'get thou away from me;' moreover this reading, inasmuch as it is the more difficult and is fortified by the authority of more than enough manuscripts, was very rightly received in succession by Griesbach, Matthäi, Knapp, Vaterus, and Scholz."
     In short, there is no plausible reason why scribes would have wanted to add what most ancient commentators thought Jesus could not or would not have said to Satan, and consequently the motive was present and the temptation great for many to remove the words, not add them (from Matt 16:23). Finally, the presence of the words both here and in regard to Peter was a purposeful tactic to reveal to the reader the seriousness of Peter's improper motives. Cf. also Burgon (Traditional Text, 169–70) for many patristic citations and sources.


Text und Textwert #9 results:

1    υπαγε οπισω μου σατανα
04C2 05 07 019 021 030 035 036 045 047 055 0211 2 3 4C 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24C 26 28 29 30 31 33 35 37 38 40C 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61T 63 64 65 66 67 68 70 71 73 74 75 76 77 78 80 83 84 86 89 90 98 99 100 105 106 107 108 109 111 112 113 117 118S 119 120 121 122 123C 125 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135S 137 138 140 141 142 143 144 146 147 149 150 151C 152 153 155 156 157 160 162 163 165 167 170 171 174 178 179 180 182 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 195 198 199 200 201 202 204 205 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 217 218 219 220 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 243 244 245 246 247 248 251 259 260 261 262C 263 266 267 269 270 272 274 275 276 277C 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 290 291 293 296 297 298 299 300 301 303 304 305 306 310 324 329 330 331 333 343 344 345 346 348 349 350S 351 352 353 354 355 358 359 360 361 363 364 365 367 370 371 373 374 375C 376 377 380 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 402 405 406 408C 409 410 411C 412 413 414 415 418 419 422 423 428 431 435 438 439 440 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 470 471 473 475 476 477 479 480 482 483 484 485 489C 490 491 492 493 494 495 496C 497 498 500 501 504 505 506 508 509 510 511 512 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 529 530 532 534 535 537 543C 544 547 548C 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 560 561 563 564* 566C 568 569 571 573 574 575 577 578 579C 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 590 591C 592 596 597 645 649 651 655 657 660 662 664 666 668 672 676 677C 679 680 683 684 685 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 696 697 703 706 708 709 711 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 722 723 724* 725 726 727 728 729 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 740 741 744 745 746 747 750 751 752 753 754 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 765 766 768S 769 772S 773 774 775 776 778 779 780C 781 782 783 785 786 787 789S 790 791 792 794 795 796 797 798 799 801 803 804 806 808 811 817 818 819 820 822 824 825 827 828 830S 833 834 835 836 839C 842 843 844 845 851 852 854 855 856 858 860 861 863 864 871C 872C 873 875 877 878 880 886 888 889 890 891 892C 893 895 896C 899C1 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 948 949 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 978 979 980 982 983 986 987 988 989 992 994C 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1023 1024 1025 1026 1029 1030 1032 1033 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042S 1043 1044 1046 1047S 1048 1050 1052 1053 1054S 1057C 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1068 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078C 1081 1082 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1095 1096 1097 1110 1111 1113 1114 1117 1120 1121 1122 1123 1125 1126 1127 1131 1132 1133 1136 1137 1138 1139 1144 1145 1146 1148 1149 1152 1155 1158 1159 1160 1163 1164 1165 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1173 1174 1179 1180 1181 1182 1185 1186 1187C 1188 1189 1190 1191C 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200S 1202 1203 1204 1207 1208 1209C 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219C 1221C 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238C 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1247 1248 1250 1251 1252 1253 1260 1261 1262 1263 1266 1268 1269 1273 1278 1279 1280 1282 1285 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1294 1296 1297 1298 1299 1301 1302 1305 1309 1310S 1312 1314C 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1322 1323 1324 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1333C 1334 1335 1336 1338 1339 1340 1341 1345 1346 1350 1352 1353 1354 1356 1357 1358 1359 1362 1364 1365 1367 1375 1377 1383 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1406 1408 1409 1410 1413 1414S 1415 1416 1418 1420 1421 1424 1432 1434 1435 1436 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1454 1455S 1456 1457 1460C 1461 1462 1463 1465 1466 1467 1468 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483C 1484 1485 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498C 1499 1501 1502 1503 1505 1506 1508 1510 1511 1519 1521 1528 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1539 1540 1541 1542C 1543 1544 1545 1547 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1563 1570 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581C 1582C 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589C 1590 1591 1592 1594 1595 1597 1600 1601 1602 1604 1605 1606 1608 1609 1613 1615 1617 1620 1622 1623 1624 1625 1628 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1637 1639 1641 1642 1643 1645 1646 1647 1649 1651 1652 1653 1660 1661 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1670 1671 1675 1676 1678 1680 1682 1685 1686 1687 1688 1690 1691C 1692 1693 1694 1695 1697 1698 1699 1700 1702 1703 1704 1712 1713 1780 1797 1800 1802 1808 1813 1814 1816 1823 1901 1966 2095 2097 2099 2107 2112 2117 2118 2120 2122 2123 2127 2131 2132 2135 2141 2142 2146 2147 2148 2159 2172 2173C 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2182 2191 2193C 2195 2201 2204S 2206 2207 2213 2215 2217 2220 2221 2229 2236 2238 2255 2260 2261 2263 2265 2266 2273 2277 2278 2280 2281 2283 2284 2290S 2291 2292 2295 2296 2297 2301 2304 2306 2314C 2315 2317 2322 2323 2324 2328 2352 2354 2355 2356 2367 2369C 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2382 2383 2386 2387 2388 2390 2394 2397 2400 2404 2405 2406 2407 2414 2420 2422 2426 2430 2439 2442 2444 2446 2450 2451 2452 2454 2458 2465 2467 2470 2471 2472 2475 2476 2477 2478 2482 2483 2487 2488 2489 2490 2492 2494 2496 2497 2499 2502 2503 2508 2509 2510 2511 2518 2520 2521 2523 2524 2525 2528S 2530 2533 2539 2545 2546 2550 2554 2555 2557 2561 2562 2567 2577 2578 2579 2581 2583 2590S 2591S 2592 2598 2603 2604C 2605 2606 2608S 2610 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2620 2622 2623 2624 2633 2635 2636 2637C 2645 2646* 2650 2651S 2653 2656 2658 2660 2665 2666 2670 2673 2676 2685 2687 2689S 2691 2692 2693S 2694 2695 2697 2701S 2702 2703 2705 2706 2707 2709S 2710 2713 2714 2715 2718 2721 2724 2726 2727 2728S 2729 2730 2734 2735 2745 2749 2753 2756 2757 2760 2765 2766 2767 2770 2773 2774 2775 2779 2780 2781 2786 2788C 2806 2808 2809 2810 2812C 2831 2835 2836
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1348

1B    υπαγε μου σατανα
1191*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

2    υπαγε σατανα
01 03 04* 017 024 028 031 032 037 042 0233 1 4* 6 13 14 22 24* 27* 34 36 39 40* 61L 72 114 123* 124 136 148 151* 158 161 164 169 173 183 194 196 240 262* 265 268 271 273 277* 278 289 334 372 375* 379 399 408* 411* 420 461 472 478 481 489* 496* 507 513 527 528 543* 546 548* 564C 565 566* 579* 591* 600 677* 699 700 707 724C 730 755 777 780* 788 793 809 826 837 839* 871* 872* 892* 896* 899* 899C2 947 951 994* 1057* 1078* 1079 1080 1083 1118 1135 1166 1172 1178 1187* 1205 1206 1209* 1219* 1221* 1238* 1281 1303 1313 1314* 1321 1325 1333* 1347 1355 1422* 1422C2 1438 1452 1458 1460* 1464S 1470 1478 1483* 1486 1498* 1542* 1546 1581* 1582* 1589* 1603 1629 1640 1672 1691* 2101 2109 2126 2133 2173* 2181 2193* 2199 2224 2267 2287 2314* 2321 2362* 2369* 2381 2411 2415 2479 2507 2516 2559S 2571 2585 2604* 2637* 2646C 2680 2684 2708 2737 2754 2812*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 180

3    υπαγε οπισω σατανα
27C 51 1272 1422C1 2362C
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 5

4    υπαγε σατανα οπισω μου
652 2223 2474
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 3

5    σατανα
2788*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

Matt 4:9 ταυτα παντα σοι

Most manuscripts read ταυτα παντα σοι (including C2 D E K L M P S U Δ Θ Ω f13 lat sy co; Ir-lat), yet an early scribe or editor, motivated by a revival of the Attic dialect, sought to enhance the perfectly good Koine by changing it into the classical ταυτα σοι παντα as reflected in some manuscripts (ℵ B C* W Z Σ f1 33 al; Or). Marks of atticistic revision in the text of the New Testament are always highly suspect, especially when evidenced by only a few manuscripts primarily of Alexandria, a place esteemed for its critical revision of texts. Cf. also the notes on Matt 2:22 and Matt 3:4. Another possible cause for the minority reading is that one or another scribe accidentally skipped παντα due to homoeoteleuton error (τα...τα), then after writing σοι he repaired his text without loss of meaning by adding the skipped word. Even Lachmann (1:15) supports the reading of most manuscripts, which is corroborated by the oldest witness of any kind, namely, Irenaeus' Old Latin translation, which is significant because it differs from the later Vulgate, which follows the Alexandrian word order.

Matt 4:9 λεγει

A few manuscripts (ℵ B C D Z f13 33 pc lat) have λεγει instead of the historic present λεγει preserved in most manuscripts (including E K L M P S U V W Γ Δ Θ Σ Ω f1). This variation mirrors the identical alteration by a few manuscripts in 4:6 (ℵ1 W Z pc). Meyer (92) judges that "it is not to be adopted . . . instead of λεγει" as it is taken from Luke 4:6. In addition to its support by the great consensus of Greek manuscripts, see the note on Matt 4:5 for a broader range of reasons why λεγει is also secure on internal grounds.

Matt 4:5 ιστησιν

A few manuscripts (ℵ B C D Z f1 33 205 pc lat sa) alter the present ιστησιν into the aorist εστησεν, disturbing the representation of the narrative as present (παραλαμβανει . . . ιστησιν . . . λεγει) and borrowing the tense of the verb from the parallel passage in Luke 4:9 (so Wettstein, 1:271; Bloomfield, GNT, 23; Meyer, 92). Most manuscripts (including E K L M P S U V W Γ Δ Θ Σ Ω f13), however, preserve ιστησιν. Griesbach (1:35–6) counters that Matthew altogether should have written the present, but that he sometimes mixes the tenses such as in 4:11 (αφιησιν . . . προσηλθον . . . διηκονουν), and that εστησεν would have displeased the grammarian who would have wanted to conform the tenses. Yet in that case (Matt 4:11) the narrative is interrupted by ιδου, where, in addition, the same supposed grammarian, if legitimate, appears completely unconcerned about the mixture of tenses. Moreover, as Fritzsche (164) rightly judges, scribes were more prone accidentally to change the historic present into a past tense; and after ιστησιν was altered (probably accidentally) into εστησεν, even though εστησεν was indeed "inept," it was nevertheless tolerated because of its presence in Luke 4:9, although in that place its presence is most suitable (ηγαγεν . . . εστησεν), "for not everywhere does a variation involving tenses have reason." Indeed, it is clear that a few manuscripts in any given place are always prone to change the historic present into the aorist (e.g.: 2:13, εφανη [B sa mae1]; 2:19, εφανη [sa mae]; 4:6 ειπεν [ℵ1 W Z pc] 4:9, ειπεν [ℵ B C D Z f13 33 pc], etc.). For these reasons the reading reflected in the vast consensus of the manuscripts, namely the historic present ιστησιν, should be retained.

Matt 4:4 ανθρωπος

Most manuscripts (including K M S Γ Ω f13) do not have the article (ο) before ανθρωπος, but the earliest surviving manuscripts do (ℵ B C D E L P U V W Z Δ Θ Σ f1 33 892 al). Wettstein (1:270), Kühnöl (93), Rinck (249), and others suggest the article was introduced from Deut 8:3 (LXX) and Luke 4:4. In Luke more manuscripts than here, but still not the consensus, have the article. The word ανθρωπος with the article appears to be a Hebraism, with which usually only a minority of manuscripts finds fault. Fritzsche (161–2) argues that the article was omitted by those who wanted to clarify that ανθρωπος was generic, whereas by the presence of the article Matthew, and even Jesus himself, meant to signify the man, i.e., the Messiah. But perhaps it was just this theologically motivated enhancement, suggested by the Hebrew האדם and the Septuagint's ο ανθρωπος at Deut 8:3, that brought about the addition of the article at this place in Matthew and in many manuscripts of Luke.
     Additionally, the circumstance that the noun ανθρωπος is usually accompanied by the definite article normally would have caused scribes to add rather than remove it, but the transcriptional possibility of accidental omission must also be considered. If most Greek manuscripts are correct, it would appear that the addition of the article was made very early and in a variety of unrelated streams of the textual tradition, either due to assimilation to the passage in the Old Testament, theological motivation, or both. Cf. also the addition of the article before ανθρωπος by a few manuscripts in John 7:23 (B N Θ 0250 33 pc).

Matt 4:3 αυτω ο πειραζων ειπεν

     Some manuscripts have αυτω ο πειραζων και ειπεν αυτω (D a b c g h sy-s.c) and others ο πειραζων ειπεν αυτω (p101vid ℵ B W f1.13 33 205 700 892vid al aur ff1 l vg sy-p mae1 bo). Griesbach (1:33–4) defends the consensus reading and describes the genealogy of the variations in this way: first the reading of Bezae (D) and some Old Latin manuscripts arose from scribes adding αυτω after ειπεν, "as happens 600 times elsewhere," but the double αυτω recurring on the same line struck some poorly, and so, second, some naturally omitted the first αυτω and retained only the second, giving rise to the reading in Sinaiticus (ℵ), Vaticanus (B), and others; "and so out of the received reading the origin of all the others is most easily explained" (1:34). Griesbach also cautions that the extra αυτω in similar places in Matthew was added either just after the προσελθων or just after the ειπεν. Bloomfield (GNT, 1:22) argues that "internal evidence is rather in favour of the position after προσ[ελθων] as being the less likely to come from the polishing school of the Alexandrian critics," and that the received reading is "most agreeable to the evangelist's simple phraseology" (Annotations, 3).
     Matthew's usual pattern is to use προσελθων/προσελθοντες absolutely, i.e., without the goal of motion specified (cf. 8:19, 25; 9:20; 13:10, 27; 14:12; 15:12, 23; 16:1; 17:7 [Byz]; 25:20, 22, 24; 26:50, 60, 73; 28:2, 9, 18). Also in 8:2 and 9:18, where the participle varies in the MSS between ελθων and προσελθων, it is in either case absolute. Verses where the goal of motion is indicated after προσελθων/προσελθοντες (by a dative pronoun or articular noun) include 17:19, 21:28, 30; 26:49; 27:58. In 4:3 and 18:21 the Byz MSS indicate the goal but Alexandrian MSS do not; in 19:16 the reverse occurs. As the absolute use of προσελθων was much more common, the likelihood for scribes to have preferred προσελθων without αυτω is increased. Of the various constructions of clauses that contain προσελθων/προσελθοντες in Matthew, the most common is participle—noun phrase/subject—verb—dative pronoun (5x: 8:19; 13:10, 27; 15:12; 28:18). The pattern participle—dative pronoun—noun phrase/subject—verb only occurs twice (4:3 and 18:21), and in both cases it is more likely that the Alexandrian text alters it to the more common pattern than the reverse. In 19:16, however, as in 8:2 and 9:18, the pattern is different in that the subject comes before the participle along with the emphatic ιδου. This appears to require the main verb to follow the participle according to Matthew's usage. (The entire substance of this paragraph is Tony Pope's.)
     Furthermore, as in, e.g., 4:4, Matthew need not always include an indirect object after verbs of speaking, yet it is not unreasonable to suggest that the frequency of occurrence of αυτω after verbs of speaking (as, e.g., in 4:6, 7, 9, 10) could have prompted the transposition in a minority of manuscripts. Also important is the theoretical observation laid out by Griesbach that the consensus reflects the original, the Western reading came second, and the Alexandrian reading came third and is dependent on the earlier Western corruption.

Matt 4:2 τεσσαρακοντα . . . τεσσαρακοντα

     There is no reason to follow the insignificant orthographical variant τεσσερακοντα that is twice read in a few manuscripts (ℵ B* C L P Δ Σ 399), since it merely reflects the Ionic spelling and not the standard Koine spelling that Matthew would have been more likely to have written. Von Soden (2:7) rightly retains τεσσαρακοντα.

Matt 3:16 ανεωχθησαν

     There is no good reason to abandon the common reading of ανεωχθησαν for the orthographical preference of the few manuscripts that read ηνεωχθησαν (B f13 pc). The same may be said in 9:30 regarding ηνεωχθησαν (B D 33) and in 27:52 regarding ηνεωχθησαν (L Θ f1 33 pc), ηνοιχθησαν (A Π* pc), and ηνεωχθη (C* pc). In Luke 1:64 no major manuscripts oppose the standard spelling ανεωχθη (one member of f13 [983] has ηνεωχθη). From a Byzantine-priority perspective it is not surprising that the η of ηνοιγησαν/διηνοιχθησαν in Mark 7:35 is left unharmed, nor that as many as a quarter of all manuscripts in John 9:10 depart from ανεωχθησαν to read ηνεωχθησαν, which may reflect an early editorial assimilation to the nearby majority ηνοιξεν (including ℵ A D etc.) or the minority ηνεωξεν (B X Δ pc) in 9:17, where a few manuscripts (K L Π), as might be expected, have ανεωξεν, which von Soden (2:435) strangely prefers.

Matt 3:16 ανεβη ευθυς

     The few witnesses (ℵ B Ds W f1 33vid 205 700 pc lat sy-p co) that transpose the words to read ευθυς ανεβη reflect either the critical idea to give ευθυς its more usual place before the verb (so Bloomfield, Annotations, 3; Meyer, 72) or harmonization to the word order of Mark 1:10 (cf. von Soden, 2:7). The word order of most manuscripts (including C E K L M P S U V Γ Δ [0233] f13 d h sy-h), as it is not inconsistent with Matthew (cf. 25:15, but note the alternative punctuation in NA27), is less common, and is not in harmony with Mark, is thus more likely to have undergone alteration than the minority reading, were it original. It is also possible that the versions, which frequently alter word order based on their own conventions, could have affected the word order of a minority of manuscripts here or there, especially since it is known that bilingual manuscripts were valued early on as a way of validating the versions, and vice versa.

Matt 3:16 και βαπτισθεις

     A small contingent of manuscripts (ℵ B C* f13 892 pc) alters και βαπτισθεις ο Ιησους into βαπτισθεις δε ο Ιησους reflecting assimilation to the wording of the prior verse, namely, αποκριθεις δε ο Ιησους (3:15). It is far more likely that the very near context would have influenced a change in 10 or so manuscripts out of more than 1600 than that remote and verbally dissimilar parallels would have done so (cf. και εβαπτισθη [Mark 1:9]; και Ιησου βαπτισθεντος [Luke 3:21]). Bloomfield (Annotations, 3) argues that intrinsic probability favors και βαπτισθεις since it is more Hellenistic and founded on the Hebrew idiom, to which he suggests comparing Rom 4:3 and James 2:23 with Gen 15:6 (LXX). According to an email correspondence from Tony Pope, who cites chapter 5 of Stephen Levinsohn, Discourse Features of New Testament Greek (2d ed.; Dallas: SIL International, 2000), a distinctive discourse feature of NT Greek is that δε is used to mark a significant development in the narrative, whereas και is often used at the beginning of the discourse to set the scene for the first significant event or at the end for its conclusion. Pope suggests that a scribe or editor, aware of this feature, could have altered the meaning of an episode or the relationship between episodes through the interchange of δε and και. If και in 3:16 is original, Pope sees it as furnishing "a setting or lead-in for the surprising event of 16b" (και ιδου . . .) and cites 9:19 as a possible similar case. Nevertheless, even if internal evidence is inconclusive, the breadth and diversity of the external support for και βαπτισθεις are superior.

----------

Note the following two constructions in Matthew:

και + partciple + ο Ιησους (20x)
8:14; 9:2, 4, 9, 19, 23; 11:4; 14:13, 14; 15:21, 29; 16:17; 17:7; 18:2; 20:17, 32; 22:1; 24:1, 4; 28:18

partciple + δε + ο Ιησους (16x)
3:15; 4:12; 8:10, 18; 12:25; 16:8, 13; 17:17; 19:26; 20:22, 34; 21:21, 24; 22:18, 29; 26:10

Matt 3:11 αγιω

     After πνευματι αγιω significant and early attestation exists for the addition of και πυρι  (p101vid ℵ B C Ds K L M U W Γ Δ Π Σ 0211 0233 f1.13 33. 399. 565. 892 al lat sy co Ju Ta Ir Tert Or, etc.), which Mill (§§690, 1098, 1177) maintains crept in from the margin. The words are absent in most manuscripts, including E S V Ω 461. 566. 1080. 1424. 2224. Griesbach (1:25–30) argues for the authenticity of the words, in part, on the grounds that they were omitted either because (1) they were considered abrasive, (2) they are lacking in Mark 1:8 and John 1:33, or (3) the church lectionary ended without the words (since the readers did not want to sadden the listeners). As lengthy as Griesbach's defense is, he nevertheless concedes: "Certainly no one is ignorant that very many interpolations of the sacred text entered from the scholia and from the commentaries of the fathers." Indeed, Matthäi (48–9) notes four manuscripts that add the words και πυρι in the margin from the scholia, and two that add the words from Chrysostom, who he says quotes the words twice but "without any doubt" from Luke. The same argues that since the Latin Vulgate was organized nearly within apostolic times it was corrupted from Chrysostom or from the old scholia, "as happens hundred times in other places." He further argues that the words εν πυρι in Luke are commented upon only minimally, and that anyone who has read Chrysostom knows how he frequently makes a harmony from multiple gospels and in the middle of interpreting Matthew and John he suddenly diverts to a different gospel, and thus the correction in Matthew is from harmonization and natural theological explanation of εν πνευματι αγιω, which of course was of paramount importance to the early church (cf. Acts 1:5; 2:3), as they were baptized in the Holy Spirit, the external sign of which was baptism by fire. Rinck (248–9), who rejects the addition, unashamedly states that "everyone acknowledges that the manuscripts strong in age and excellence were just as prone to supplement the context from parallel passages," and that suggesting that the church lectionary influenced the omission is unpersuasive, since the very reason that the church lectionary omitted και πυρι may very well have been because it was not thought to have been a part of Matthew's Gospel. Certainly it is agreed that the words were added to Matthew's Gospel at a very primitive stage, and once added, they could hardly have been omitted by any conscientious scribe who had the words in his exemplar, and those without the words in their exemplars would have felt constant temptation to add the words. Yet, as the evidence suggests, the majority of scribes did not add the words which originally belonged to Luke's Gospel, not Matthew's.

Matt 3:11 βαπτιζω υμας

     After εγω μεν at the beginning of the verse, a few manuscripts (p101 ℵ* B W 33 700 990 f1.13) transpose the words to read υμας βαπτιζω "for the purpose of better adapting the words to those at the end of the verse" (Bloomfield, GNT, 19). There was no need for Matthew to emphasize the first υμας, since doing so would have lessened the significance of the emphasis of the second υμας. By far the more memorable clause is the second of the two that contain υμας, and the word order of the second (υμας βαπτισει εν) may well have influenced an early scribe to conform the word order of the less familiar first occurrence to the more familiar second. Additionally, the critic could have thought to improve the construction by choosing a simple way to avoid the hiatus of βαπτιζω υμας, or to attach the prepositional phrase (εν υδατι) to the verb βαπτιζω just as the more famous prepositional phrase at the end of the sentence (εν πνευματι αγιω) is attached to βαπτισει. It is far less likely that all other manuscripts should reflect harmonization either to Mark 1:8 or Luke 3:16 or alteration of a perfectly fine construction than that a minority of manuscripts would reflect conformation to the word order that appears in the very same verse.

Matt 3:10 δε και

     A few manuscripts (ℵ B C Ds M W Δ 0233 f1 700 pc co) omit και after δε either by accident or because it was considered redundant. Erasmus (2:19) notes the και is "not an idle conjunction, for it indicates with an increase in force that imminent danger approaches." Wettstein (1:265) follows Erasmus, and Griesbach (1:24–5), noting the same motivation behind the omission of και in Codex Bezae (D/05) at the parallel passage of Luke 3:9, says it was omitted because it appeared superfluous and that scribes failed to understand its force. Such especially applies to the versions, which in turn could have influenced the omission in some Greek copies. Fritzsche (131–2) rightly cautions that just because ηδη δε και was common among Greek writers does not mean that the και would have been spared from tampering had it for some reason been deemed unsuitable, and that at first glance δε pertains to the entire sentence to focus and multiply its greater intensity, and thus the και was thought unnecessary; yet the και indicates that the ax was even brought near to the trees, which, as Kühnöl (70) who says και was wrongly omitted notes, frequently refer to mankind in Scripture (Ps 1:3; Matt 7:17–19; John 15:1; Rom 11:17, etc.). Bloomfield (Annotations, 2–3) notes that the harshness of the construction lowers the possibility that και was introduced from harmonization to Luke 3:9, and that it was removed because it was thought to overload the construction, as was the και that is omitted in some manuscripts in Luke 5:35 (ℵ C F L M Θ f1.13 [and many late minuscules], etc.). Matthew is not unaccustomed to using δε και at the beginning of clauses (10:18 [versus Mark 13:9 and Luke 21:12]; 10:30 [versus Luke 12:7]; 18:17; 24:49 [versus Luke 12:45, which has τε και]; 25:22, 24 [versus Luke 19:18, 20], etc.). Moreover, examples may be multiplied where scribes, and especially the originators of the versions, opted to omit either δε or και when encountering the δε και combination (Matt 25:22 [δε omitted by ℵ B pc sa]; 26:35 [δε omitted by ℵ B C D L 067vid 0281 33 70 al lat sy mae bo-mss]; 27:41 [δε omitted by B K Θ f1.13 33 565 700 al lat sy-[s].p bo-pt; δε και omitted by ℵ A L W pc bo-pt]; Mark 14:31 [δε omitted by B f1 579 pc a c k sa-mss bo-ms]; Luke 6:6 [και omitted by ℵ B L X f1.13 33 pc it co sy-s.c]; 18:1 [και omitted by ℵ B L f13 pc a b c q co], etc.). See also Scholz (1:clxv), who similarly argues against the Alexandrian tampering of the intrinsically Lukan construction verb + δε και. Thus both internal and external evidence firmly support the authenticity of και. Cf. also the note on Matt 1:22 regarding scribal propensity toward omission over addition.

Matt 3:6 Ιορδανη

     After Ιορδανη a considerable number of manuscripts add ποταμω (ℵ B C* M S W Δ Σ 0233 f1 33 205 346 579 1424 al q sy sa bo), a probable scribal harmonization to Mark 1:5, as indicated by Wettstein (1:259), Griesbach (1:24), Fritzsche (120), Bloomfield (Annotations, 2), Tischendorf (7th ed., 1:8), Meyer (72), von Soden (1:5), and others. Griesbach, echoing Wettstein and demonstrating his view on the Synoptic Problem, commends the "shorter and older" reading, saying it was unnecessary for Matthew, writing to men who were well acquainted with Palestinian matters, to mention that the Jordan was the name of a certain river, but that Mark, wishing to serve the interests of readers living far from Judea, intentionally clarified Matthew's words through additions of this kind both here and elsewhere. The same logic militates against those few versions (sy sa bo), which also were made for those who were more likely to have been unfamiliar with Palestinian topography. There is no good reason why all other manuscripts, including the oldest Old Latin manuscripts (4th and 5th cent.) and perhaps the oldest Coptic manuscript (mae1, ca. 400), would have deleted the word, if original, just as almost all Greek manuscripts left the word alone at Mark 1:5. Indeed, as may be expected, only a few manuscripts in Mark (D W Θ 565 700 a) harmonize that place to Matthew by omitting ποταμω, just as only a minority of the 1500+ Greek manuscripts available here harmonize this place to Mark.

Matt 3:4 αυτου ην

     Reflecting an attempt to improve the text, a few manuscripts (ℵ B C D W f1) have ην αυτου, an atticism indicative of the critical editing found in those manuscripts and their relatives. Bloomfield (Annotations, 2) judges that ην αυτου is "the very position that a classical Greek writer would have used," while αυτου ην is the one a Hellenistic Greek writer would have used, thus making it intrinsically more probable. A critical desire to give variance to the phraseology repeated already twice in the same verse (το ενδυμα αυτου . . . την οσφυν αυτου . . . η δε τροφη αυτου) may have motivated the change, but such is precisely the style of the kind of Koine Greek that Matthew writes (cf., e.g., 3:12: τη χειρι αυτου . . . την αλωνα αυτου . . . τον σιτον αυτου, etc.). The slim support for ην αυτου cannot overthrow the aggregate weight of all other manuscripts, and since scribes tended to make the text not less elegant but rather, indeed, to polish and refine unexceptional expressions, it is precisely this class of readings that arouses suspicion, especially when found in only a few manuscripts. Cf. Matt 2:22 επι for a similarly-motivated improvement of the text.

Matt 3:3 υπο

     The preposition υπο is changed into δια in a number of manuscripts (ℵ B C D W f1.13 33 157 265 700 1354 lat sy), most of which reflect the same alteration in 2:17. Matthäi (45) states that "no manuscript of good reputation" has δια here. For reasons why the consensus reading υπο cannot easily be rejected, see the note on Matt 2:17 υπο.

Matt 2:22 Ηρωδου του πατρος αυτου

Reflecting either individual preference or an emphasis on Archelaus' relationship to Herod the Great, a handful of manuscripts (ℵ B C* W) transpose the words to read του πατρος αυτου Ηρωδου, a stylistic adjustment similar to that made by two of the same manuscripts (ℵ B) in Matt 2:3. Such a word order usually reflects emphasis of some kind, and is not uncommon (Mark 11:10; Luke 1:59; John 4:12; cf. also Mark 1:20; Luke 1:59; John 4:12; 8:39, 53; Acts 2:16; 8:28, 30, etc.). Since the word order of the few copies is extremely isolated and, were it original, should hardly have caused all other copies and versions to alter it given its familiarity to scribes, the consensus reading is to be preferred.

Matt 2:22 επι

Some manuscripts (ℵ B N Σ f1.13 33 565 700 892 pc) reflect a spirit of reviving the pure Attic dialect by omitting επι (commonly used with βασιλευω in the OT) after the verb βασιλευει in order to create a more classical construction. Bloomfield (GNT, 13–14) remarks that the Alexandrian critics knew well that classical usage requires its absence, that it is rarely if not never used by the classical writers, that it was thus cancelled by fastidious critics who wished to get rid of an unnecessary and unclassical construction, and that B and its usual supporters "abound in such uncritical alterations" (emphasis his). Meyer (56) agrees that επι could easily have been omitted as unnecessary, and perhaps even by accident since the syllable ει preceded it. The preposition επι should be retained for these reasons, and also for its early and diverse support (including C D E K L M S U V Γ Δ Π W). Cf. also the note on Matt 1:22 concerning a similar omission of a word most likely deemed superfluous.

Matt 2:21 ηλθεν

     The compound form εισηλθεν that appears in a few manuscripts (ℵ B C 159 273 399) arose, according to Bloomfield (Annotations, 2), either from scribal error or from "critical alteration to a more significant term," as happens at Acts 18:7, where εισηλθεν εις is also found in some manuscripts (p74 ℵ A D* 33 104 323 945 1175 1739 pc lat sy-p.hmg). Alternatively, if the minority reading εισηλθεν is secondary to the reading found in Eusebius and the Sahidic (i.e., επανηλθεν), it is possible that an editor chose to improve the style by conforming the preposition of the compound verb (επαν-) to the preposition that follows (εις). In Matthew, both the constructions ερχομαι + εις (used 20x) and εισερχομαι + εις (used 25x) are common enough, and it is absurd to think that a passage so verbally dissimilar and remote as Mark 1:14 would have caused the alteration of εισηλθεν into ηλθεν at this place, especially since such alterations are commonplace among a minority of manuscripts in the Gospel of Matthew itself (cf. 8:14 [εισελθων in several minuscules]; 9:28 [εισελθοντι in ℵ* Σ Ν]; 13:36 [εισηλθεν in ℵ Or]; 17:25 [ελθοντα in ℵ1 B f1 892]; 18:8 [ελθειν in several minuscules, it sy-s.c]; 19:17 [ελθειν in D 71 sy-s]; 21:10 [ελθοντος in ℵ* 566 1675*]; 21:23 [εισελθοντι in K Π]; 27:53 [ηλθεν in D lat sy-s.c]; 28:11 [εισελθοντες in Σ]). The two other cases of people entering a "land" (εις γην [2:20] and εις την γην [14:34] have the simple form of the verb, but such is hardly enough evidence to build an intrinsic case for the probability of ηλθεν here. Given the state of things, it is reasonable to suppose, as elsewhere in Matthew when the same variations arise, that a minority of manuscripts will generally reflect remote scribal alterations that failed to gain traction against the multiplying numerical superiority of the copies of the original text, and therefore ηλθεν, secured by the preponderate weight of more than 1600 Greek manuscripts from everywhere, is not to be rejected.

Matt 2:19 κατ οναρ φαινεται

Some witnesses (ℵ B D Z Σ 0250 f1.13 157 1574 pc lat) reflect scribal assimilation to the exact expression six verses earlier (2:13) and thus have φαινεται κατ οναρ, but the less exact and slightly more remote passage of 1:20, where the manner of the appearance is given emphasis, demonstrates that κατ οναρ φαινεται is also Matthean, even though at that place some witnesses (Θ 543 788 826 1689 it) alter the word order to εφανη κατ οναρ (removing the emphasis). Fritzsche (98) thinks that Matthew "deliberately preposed κατ οναρ here so that the words more carefully fixed for making up expressions with φαινεται would not perpetrate an annoyance on the reader, had they been reckoned a broken series," namely, "he appears -- (indeed even) in his sleep -- to Joseph -- in Egypt -- with this mandate," etc. There is no good reason to abandon the intrinsically good and externally well-supported reading of the consensus. Note that in 2:13 Codex Vaticanus (B) alone has κατ οναρ εφανη, an obvious assimilation to 1:20, and εις την χωραν αυτων after αυτων, an accretion from 2:12.

Matt 2:18 θρηνος και

A few witnesses (ℵ B Z 0250 f1 pc lat sy-p co) omit θρηνος και before κλαυθμος και οδυρμος πολυς, eliminating the common "rule of three" formula for emphasis (cf. 5:11; 7:7; 8:12; 13:15; 16:24 22:37, etc.). Wettstein (1:251) proposed that the words could have been omitted in a few manuscripts due to scribal alignment with various versions, the early translators of which having omitted the words because they struggled to find three suitable synonymous words. It is also possible that the words were omitted either because they were deemed superfluous (so Fritzsche, 95–6) or because concerned critics sought to align the text with the "original" words of Jeremiah, perhaps even via Origen's critical masterpiece, the Hexapla. The reading of the Bohairic version (bo), which omits κλαυθμος και οδυρμος πολυς, lends credence to the judgment that at least some versional editors, seeing superfluity in three synonymous words, sought to "improve" the text by means of omission. The omission of the words in the Diatessaron also no doubt contributed to the perpetuation of the error. But as Bloomfield (GNT, 13) has ably shown, it certainly cannot be said that the LXX of Jer 31:15 (= 38:15 LXX) represents an inaccurate translation of the Hebrew, which reads נהי בכי תמרורים (literally: "wailing, weeping, bitter [lamentations]" or "wailing, weeping of bitter [lamentations]"), which the LXX renders as [φωνη . . .] θρηνου και κλαυθμου και οδυρμου. Matthew uses these Greek words but adapts them slightly to the Hebrew expression in the nominative case. It is not surprising that Justin omits the words, since his testimony frequently aligns with Tatian's, but nevertheless Whitby (139–40) rightly cautions that Justin may be citing from a Jeremiah source other than from Matthew. Moreover, since (1) there are sufficient reasons why θρηνος και would have been omitted, (2) Matthew was probably aware of the wording of the LXX and adapted it as needed, (3) early scribes of Matthew omitted text more than twice as often as added it (cf. note: Matt 1:22 του), and (4) the words are upheld by early and diverse testimony (C D L W Σ 0233 f13 33 sy-s.c.h) combined with the consensus of most Greek manuscripts, the words are more likely to have been present originally in Matthew's Gospel than not.


Text und Textwert #5 results:

1    θρηνος και
04 05 07 017 019 021 028 030 031 032 036 037 041 042 045 055 0211 0233 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40S 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 63 64 65 66 67 68 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 80 83 84 86 89 90 98 100 105 106 107 108 109 111 112 113 114 116 117 118S 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135S 136 137 138 140 141 142 143 144 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 160 161 162 163 164 165 167 169 170 171 173 174 178 179 180 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 195 196 198 199 200 201 202 204 205 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 217 218 219 220 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 240 243 244 245 246 247 248 251 259 260 261 262 263 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 277 278 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 293 296 297 298 299 300 301 303 304 305 306 310 324 329 330 331 333 334 335 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350S 351 352 353 354 355 358 359 360 361 363 364 365 366 367 371 373 374 375 376 377 379 380 386 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 399 402 405 406 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 418 419 420 422 423 428 431 435 438 439 440 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 461 470 471 472 473 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 500 501 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 527 528 529 530 532 534 535 537 543 544 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 560 561 563 564 565 566 568 569 571 573 574 575 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 591 592 594 596 597 600 645 649 651 652 655 657 660 662 663 664 666 668 672 676 677 679 680 683 684 685 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 696 697 699 700 703 707 708 709 711 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 732 733 734 736 737 738 740 741 744S 745 746 747 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 769 772S 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 785 786 787 788 789S 790 791 792 793 794S 795 796 797 798 799 801 803 804 805 806 808 809 811 817 818 819 820 822 824 825 826 827 828 830 833 834 835 836 837 839 842 843 844 845 851 852 854 855 856 858 860 861 863 864 871 872 873 875 877 878 880 881 886 888 889 890 891 892 893 895 896 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 978 979 980 982 983 986 987 988 989 992 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1023 1024 1025 1026 1029 1030 1032 1033 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042S 1043 1044 1046 1047S 1048 1050 1052 1053 1054S 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1068 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1095 1096 1097 1110 1111 1113 1114 1117 1118 1120 1121 1122 1123 1125 1126 1127 1131 1132 1133 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1144 1145 1146 1148 1149 1152 1155 1157 1158 1159 1160 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200S 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1247 1248 1250 1251 1252 1253 1261 1262 1263 1266 1268 1269 1272 1273 1278 1279S 1280 1281 1282 1285 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1294 1296 1297 1298 1299 1301 1302 1303 1305 1309 1310S 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1333 1334 1335 1336 1338 1339 1340 1341 1345 1346 1347 1350 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1362 1364 1365 1367 1375 1377 1383 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1406 1408 1409 1410 1413 1414S 1415 1416 1418 1420 1421 1422 1424 1432 1434 1435 1436 1438 1439 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1470 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1501 1502 1503 1505 1506 1508 1510 1511 1519 1521 1528 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1555 1556 1557 1559 1560 1563 1564 1570 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582C 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1594 1595 1597 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1608 1609 1612 1613 1615 1617 1620 1622 1625 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1637 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1645 1646 1647 1649 1651 1652 1653 1659 1660 1661 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1670 1671 1672 1675 1676 1678 1680 1682 1685 1686 1687 1688 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1697 1698 1699 1700 1702 1703 1704 1712 1780 1797 1800 1802 1813 1814 1816 1823 1901 1966 2095 2097 2099 2100 2101 2107 2108 2109 2112 2117 2118 2120 2122 2123 2126 2127 2131 2132 2133 2135 2139 2141 2142 2146 2147 2148 2159 2173 2174 2175 2176 2178 2181 2182 2191 2193 2195 2199 2201 2204S 2207 2213 2215 2217 2220 2221 2223 2224 2229 2236 2238 2255 2260 2261 2263 2265 2266 2267 2273 2277 2278 2280 2281 2283 2284 2287 2290S 2291 2292 2295 2296 2297 2301 2304 2306 2314 2315 2317 2321 2322 2323 2324 2328 2352 2354 2355 2356 2362 2367 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2381 2382 2383 2386 2387 2388 2390 2394 2397 2398 2400 2404 2405 2406 2407 2411 2414 2415 2420 2422 2426 2430 2439 2442 2444 2446 2450 2451 2452 2454 2458 2465 2467 2470 2471 2472 2474 2475 2476 2477 2478 2479 2482 2483 2487 2488 2489 2490 2492 2494 2496 2497 2499 2502 2503 2507 2508 2509 2510 2511 2516 2518 2520 2523 2524 2525 2528S 2530 2533 2539 2545 2546 2550 2554 2555 2557 2559S 2561 2562 2567 2571 2579 2581 2583 2590S 2591S 2597 2598 2603 2604 2605 2606 2608S 2610 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2620 2622 2623 2624 2633 2635 2636 2637 2645 2646 2650 2651S 2653 2656 2658 2660 2665 2666 2670 2673 2676 2680 2684 2685 2687 2689 2691 2692 2693S 2694 2695 2701S 2702 2703 2705 2706 2707 2708 2709S 2710 2713 2714 2715 2718 2721 2722 2724 2726 2727 2728S 2729 2730 2734 2735 2745 2749 2754 2756 2757 2760 2765 2766 2767 2770 2773 2774 2775 2779 2780 2786 2788 2806 2808 2809 2810 2812 2826 2827 2831 2835 2836
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1456

1B    θρηνος
2578
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

1C    θηλλος και
1260T
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

1D    θρυλος και
1260L
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

2    Omit
01 03 035 0250 1 22 279 372 1491 1582* 2737
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 11

V    Omission of κλαυθμος to πολυς
2577
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

Matt 2:17 υπο

The relatively insignificant alteration of υπο into δια (which also occurs in 3:3) is reflected in a number of manuscripts (ℵ B C D W Z 21 33 71 157 372 399 579 892 1170 1588 it vg sy-p.h). Internal evidence is divided, for, on the one hand, it might be argued (so Griesbach, 1:22) that Matthew's custom was to use δια in reference to prophets in such expressions (1:22; 2:15, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; 22:31; 24:15; 27:9), while, on the other hand, this very circumstance may have caused some scribes to alter υπο into δια (so Griesbach, who says the reading δια therefore "remains doubtful"; and Fritzsche, 94). While it is known that a minority of scribes altered δια into υπο on other occasions (2:23 [C 472]; 8:17 [517 Chr]; 12:17 [C2 N Π Σ 517 659 954 Chr; 1424 omits δια]; 13:35 [Π]; 21:4 [L Z Γ Δ Θ f13 482 544 700 892 sy-{s}.c]), it is suspicious that the consensus of so many Greek manuscripts, if secondary, would only have made such an alteration here and in 3:3; in other words, if υπο was so common as to cause its introduction by scribes into nearly all the manuscripts both here and in 3:3 (so Rinck, 247), why not elsewhere? Bloomfield (Annotations, 2) argues that δια is "a mere correction for greater exactness" (namely, it was not spoken by but through the prophet), suggested by the constructions previously written (cf. 1:22; 2:5, 15). On the same grounds that led von Soden to accept υπο in Matt 21:4 based on, in our opinion, much slimmer external support than that for υπο both here and in 3:3, the reading υπο cannot easily be dismissed in these two places. Due to the apparent conflict between intrinsic and transcriptional probabilities, one may choose either to leave this variation in "suspense" (so Hort, Introduction, 2) or simply to trust the text that "is found habitually to contain these morally certain or at least strongly preferred readings" (Ibid., 32). Our investigation has led us to believe that the more "habitually" accurate text to be trusted in such situations is none other than the consensus text that is commonly referred to as Byzantine. Consequently, υπο is to be preferred both here and in 3:3.

Matt 2:15 του

Some manuscripts (ℵ B C D W Z Γ Δ Π Σ f1 33 579 pc) omit του before κυριου either by accident, to improve the style, or to assimilate the expression to the common OT usage or to nearby passages where the article is absent (1:20, 24; 2:13, 19, etc.). See previous note: Matt 1:22 του. The presence of του is to be preferred.

Matt 2:5 ειπον

     A few manuscripts (ℵ B pc) have ειπαν, apparently reflecting a preference for the Egyptian manner of spelling ειπον. See also Matt 5:1 προσηλθον and Matt 7:13 εισελθετε.

Matt 2:9 εστη

     A few manuscripts (ℵ B C D f1 33 205 pc) alter the aorist active εστη into the aorist passive εσταθη, perhaps reflecting a pious improvement of the text, namely, as Fritzsche (77) contends, to teach that the star did not stop accidentally by its own power but rather that its course had been prevented by divine influence. Wettstein (1:247), citing Ammonius as an example, notes that the grammarians differentiated the action of the two words, σταθηναι indicating action by means of another and στηναι indicating action by one's own power, but also comments that the biblical authors did not always follow such tidy distinctions (cf. Luke 8:44; 18:11, 40; 19:8; Acts 2:14; 17:22, etc.). Bloomfield (Annotations, 1) agrees that εσταθη is a critical emendation, and chides the critics who should have known that εστη was to be taken in a "popular" sense, namely, that the star "ceased to advance and indeed disappeared." Meyer (56) likewise discerns that εσταθη is "of the nature of a gloss" in order to make the expression more precise, noting the same variation in 27:11 in almost the same manuscripts (ℵ B C L Θ Σ f1 33 pc). These internal reasons support the reading of the consensus of over 1600 Greek manuscripts, and thus εστη is to be retained.

Matt 2:8 ακριβως εξετασατε

     A few witnesses (ℵ B C* D Σ f1.13 33vid 157 205 pc lat) transpose the words to read πορευθεντες εξετασατε ακριβως, perhaps (so Wettstein, 1:247) an attempted improvement of the text by removing any ambiguity concerning which word ακριβως was to modify (was it "go directly and search" or "go and search accurately"?). Bloomfield (Annotations, 1) argues that the reading of the few manuscripts "certainly makes better composition" and thus is indicative of "critical emendation," whereas Griesbach (1:19) says the transposition was accidental rather than intentional. But if the error was accidental, it is much more likely that scribes, after writing πορευθεντες, would have skipped ακριβως in anticipation of the imperative since such a construction is relatively common (cf. Matt 9:13; 11:4; 28:19; Luke 7:22; 13:32; 17:14; 22:8) than, were the reading of the few manuscripts original, that they would have skipped the imperative and first written ακριβως. Matthew frequently places the adverb before the word it modifies (cf. 1:18, 19; 2:7; 4:20, 22 [versus αφεντες ευθεως in Mark 1:20]; 5:24, 28; 8:8, 21 [versus απελθοντι πρωτον in Luke 9:59]; 21:28; 26:34; 28:7, etc.). See Matt 14:15, where Matthew's ηδη παρηλθεν is transposed by a few manuscripts (ℵ Z f1 pc), a transposition that may or may not have been influenced by the possible earlier omission of ηδη as reflected in some versions (sy-c.p sa bo); cf. also παλιν in 26:44, αρτι in 26:53, εξω in 26:69, etc., for similar examples of transposition with omission. Griesbach notes that two manuscripts of not much authority omit ακριβως, an error that he believes arose due to the earlier transposition, but which was more likely caused by accident, as mentioned above, due to anticipation of the imperative following πορευθεντες. But scribes were more likely to remove possible ambiguity than vice versa. Accordingly, in Matt 26:44 the same principle militates against the reading of some manuscripts (ℵ B C D L 067 pc lat sa bo), which alter the slightly ambiguous απελθων παλιν προσηυξατο ("again he went away and prayed" or "he went away and prayed again") into the less ambiguous παλιν απελθων προσηυξατο ("again he went away and prayed"; note the early omission of παλιν [p37 Θ f1.13 pc a sy-s], presumably to omit what was thought superfluous, especially if παλιν was taken with προσηυξατο which is already modified by εκ τριτου that follows). For all of these reasons the authenticity of the word order reflected in most Greek manuscripts, namely, ακριβως εξετασατε, is to be maintained.

Matt 2:3 Ηρωδης ο βασιλευς

A few manuscripts (ℵ B D Z f1.13 157 273; b c k bo) transpose the expression to read ο βασιλευς Ηρωδης. However, in a phrase that contains a proper name and a title or other classifying word the normal order in the NT is the title followed by the name. For example, one finds Ιερεμιου του προφητου (2:17; 27:9), Ησαιου του προφητου (3:3; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17), Ιωνα του προφητου (12:39; 16:4), Δανιηλ του προφητου (24:15), Ανδρεαν τον αδελφον (4:18), Ιωαννην τον αδελφον (4:21), Ανδρεας ο αδελφος (10:2), Ηρωδιαδα την γυναικα Φιλιππου του αδελφου αυτου (14:3), Ιωαννην τον αδελφον (17:1), Ιησου χριστου (1:1, 18), Ιησους ο λεγομενος χριστος (1:16), Ιησου υιε του θεου (8:29), Ιησους ο προφητης (21:11, but a few manuscripts have ο προφητης ιησους), Ιησου του Γαλιλαιου (26:69), Ιησου του Ναζωραιου (26:71), Ιησουν τον λεγομενον χριστον (27:17, 22), Ιησους ο βασιλευς των Ιουδαιων (27:37). On the other hand, Matthew also writes της μητρος αυτου Μαριας (1:18) in contrast to Μαριας της μητρος αυτου (2:11), perhaps to draw attention to the relationship. Thus it is possible that the variant reading preposing ο βασιλευς is a critical alteration, either to give variation to the same expression that occurs in 2:1 (so Bloomfield, Annotations, 1) or to put focus on the title to highlight Herod's role as king in the narrative. Matthäi (37) mentions the omission of ο βασιλευς in six manuscripts, which, if not due to simple scribal error, probably resulted because scribes either considered the expression superfluous or sought to conform it to the places in the rest of the chapter where the title is missing (2:7, 12, 13, 15, 16, 19, 22). Especially as many early papyri were originally bilingual Greek/Latin manuscripts, it is also feasible that the title, after being omitted accidentally in some Latin manuscripts where it consists of only three letters (rex), could have contributed to the transposition upon its reintroduction to the text (e.g., it is written above the line in Codex H; 7th cent.). As for other possible causes, it is at least doubtful that the transposition could be due to assimilation to so remote a passage as Mark 6:14, where ο βασιλευς Ηρωδης is secure with only minor variation. In the end, there is little reason to reject the order Ηρωδης ο βασιλευς, which, in addition to most Greek manuscripts, has the support of four Greek manuscripts from the 6th century and earlier (C N W Σ), the oldest Old Latin manuscript (a/3 Vercellensis; 4th cent.) and the important Brixianus (f/10; 6th cent.), and also the Vulgate and Sahidic versions.

Matt 1:25 τον υιον αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον

A few witnesses (ℵ B Zvid 071vid 1 33 788 1192 1582* it mae1 [sy-c sa bo]) depart from the consensus and read simply υιον instead of τον υιον αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον, which latter expression Bengel (Apparatus, 93) and others suggest entered here from Luke 2:7, an explanation Whitney (1:58–61) calls "pure conjecture." The older nature of the longer reading is established by its presence in a completely Matthean sequence of Tatian's Diatessaron (2.1–7 = Matt 1:18–25), a fact openly conceded by Hort (Appendix, 8) and other critics such as von Soden (1:3) and corroborated by its appearance in the Latin translation of Ephrem's commentary, where it is quoted three times as primogenitum (cf. Mösinger, 25). Mill (Prolegomena, §18), Wettstein (1:239), Griesbach (1:17), Meyer (35), and others suggest that the shorter reading originated in a diligent but futile attempt to suppress the notion that Mary gave birth to more babies after Jesus was born (Griesbach logically suggests the same motivation behind the omission of πριν η συνελθειν αυτους in two manuscripts in 1:18). Fritzsche (55) calls this explanation absurd, arguing instead that the phrase was omitted on account of its clearly superfluous appearance, since the child of one expressly referred to as a virgin (1:23) would obviously be her firstborn. Griesbach plainly states that it appears less probable that the phrase was moved to this place from Luke 2:7, and additional evidence confirms his judgment. The probability is great that the appearance of τεξεται υιον not only once in 1:21 but again in 1:23 would have influenced a careless scribe to repeat the manner of expression upon the third appearance of the verb τικτω in so short a space, namely, she shall bear a son . . . she shall bear a son . . . she bore a son). Assimilation to the nearby context is always more probable than harmonization to a remote parallel, especially (so Whitney) if the error occurred in the earliest of times before Matthew's gospel travelled alongside others. Whitney further argues on grammatical grounds that Matthew at the very least would not have written υιον without the definite article after it appeared without such in 1:21 and 1:23 in anticipation of the son that was to be born, pointing to the addition of τον or αυτης or both by scribes who perceived the problem created by earlier scribes, and that πρωτοτοκον completes the idea that Joseph did not "know" Mary until after Jesus' birth, indicating, as is suggested elsewhere (Matt 12:46; 13:55, 56; Mark 6:3, etc.), that Joseph and Mary later had children together. Intrinsically, as Whitney states, the expression is "just what might be expected to have been written by this evangelist." The authenticity of τον υιον αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον is to be preferred not only because it has second-century attestation and remarkable internal arguments in its favor but primarily because of its presence in the overwhelming consensus of all Greek manuscripts (ca. 1450 manuscripts), including important representatives from every texttype (C D E K L M S U V W Γ Δ Π 087 565 892, etc.); thus the internal evidence merely corroborates the conclusion already called for by the external evidence due to the apparent habitual accuracy of the consensus Greek text.

Text und Textwert #4 results:

1    τον υιον αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον
04 05* 07 017 021 022 028 030 031 032 036 037 041 042 045 047 055 087 0211 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 26 27C 28 29 31 34 35 36 37 38 39 40S 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 63 65 66 67 68 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 80 83 84 86 89 90 98 100 105 106 107 108 109 111 112 113 114 116 117 118S 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135S 136 137 138 140 141 142 143 144 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 160 161 162 163 164 165 167 169 170 171 173 178 179 180 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 195 196 198 199 200 201 202 204 205 207 208 209 210S 211 212 213 214 215 217 218 219 220 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 240 243 244 245 246 247 248 251 259 260 261 262 263 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 293 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 303 304 305 306 310 324 329 330 331 333 334 335 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350S 351 352 353 354 355 358 359 360 361 363 364 365 367 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 379 380 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 399 402 405 406 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 418 419 420 422 423 428 431 438 439 440 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 461 470 471 472 473 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 500 501 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 527 528 529 530 532 534 535 537 543 544 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 560 561 563 564 565 566 568 569 571 573 574 575 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 591 592 594 596 597 600 645 649 651 652 655 657 660 662 663 664 666 668 672 676 677 679 680 683 684 685 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 696 697 699 700 703 706 707 708 709 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 736 737 738 740 741 744S 745 746 747 750 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 769 772S 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 785 786 787 789S 790 791 792 793 794S 795 796 797 798 799 801 803 804 805 806 808 809 811 817 818 819 820 822 824 825 826 827 828 830 833 834 835 836 837C 839 842 843 844 845 851 852 854 855 856 858 860 861 863 864 871 872 873 875 877 878 880 881 886 888C 889 890 891 892 893 895 896 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 931 932 933 934 935 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 978 979 980 982 983 986 987 988 989 992 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1023 1024 1025 1026 1029 1030 1032 1033 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042S 1043 1046 1047S 1048 1050 1052 1053 1054S 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1068 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1095 1096 1097 1110 1111 1113 1114 1117 1118 1120 1121 1122 1123 1125 1126 1127 1131 1132 1133 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1144 1145 1146 1148 1149 1152 1155 1157 1158 1159 1160 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1178 1179 1180 1181 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200S 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1247 1248 1250 1251S 1252 1254 1260 1261 1262 1263 1266 1268 1269 1272 1273 1278 1279S 1280 1281 1282 1288 1289 1290 1292 1294 1296 1297 1298 1299 1301 1302 1303 1305 1309 1310S 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1333 1334 1335 1336 1338 1339 1340 1341 1345 1346 1347 1350 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1362 1364 1365 1367 1375 1377 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1401 1402 1403 1404 1406 1408 1409 1410 1413 1414S 1415 1416 1418 1420 1421 1422 1432 1434 1435 1436 1438 1439 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1501 1502 1503 1505 1506 1508 1510 1511 1519 1521 1528 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1545 1547 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1563 1570 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1581 1582C 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1594 1595 1597 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1609 1612 1613 1615 1617 1620 1622 1623 1625 1626 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1637 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1645 1646 1647 1649 1652 1653 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1667 1668 1670 1671 1672 1676 1678 1679 1680 1682 1685 1686 1687 1688 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1697 1698 1699 1700 1702 1703 1704 1713 1780 1797 1800 1802 1803 1804 1808 1813 1814 1816 1901 1966 2095 2097 2099 2100 2101 2107 2109 2112 2117 2118 2120 2122 2123 2126 2127 2131 2132 2133 2135 2139 2141 2142 2146 2147 2148 2159 2173 2174 2175 2176 2178 2181 2182 2191 2193 2195 2199 2201 2204S 2206 2207 2213 2215 2217 2220 2221 2223 2224 2229 2236 2238 2255 2260 2261 2263 2265 2266 2267 2273 2277 2280 2281 2283 2284 2287 2290S 2291 2292 2295 2296 2297 2301 2304 2306 2314 2315 2317 2321 2322 2323 2324 2328 2352 2354 2355 2356 2362 2367 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2381 2382 2383 2386 2387 2388 2390 2394 2396 2397 2398 2400 2404 2405 2406 2407 2411 2414 2415 2420 2422 2426 2430 2439 2442 2444 2446 2450 2451 2452 2454 2458 2465 2467 2470 2472 2474 2476 2477 2478 2479 2482 2483 2487 2488 2490 2492 2494 2496 2497 2499 2502 2503 2507 2508 2509 2510 2511 2516 2518 2520 2521 2523 2524 2525 2528S 2530 2533 2539 2545 2546 2550 2554 2555 2557 2559S 2561 2562 2567 2571 2577 2578 2579 2581 2585 2590S 2591S 2592 2597 2598 2603 2604 2605 2606 2608S 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2620 2622 2623 2624 2633 2634 2635 2636 2637 2645 2646 2650 2651S 2653 2656 2658 2660 2665 2666 2670 2673 2676 2680 2684 2685 2687 2689 2691 2692 2693S 2694 2701S 2702 2705 2706 2707 2708 2709 2710 2713 2714 2715 2718 2721 2724 2726 2727 2728S 2729 2730 2734 2735 2737 2745 2749 2756 2757 2760 2765 2767 2770 2773 2774 2775 2780 2786 2788 2806 2808 2809 2810 2812 2831 2835 2836
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1446

1B    τον υιος αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον
30
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

1C    τον υιον αυτοις τον πρωτοτοκον
837* 1546 2695
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 3

1D    τον υιον αυτου τον πρωτοτοκον
279 513
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 2

1E    τον υιον αυτος τον πρωτοτοκον
1374
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

1F    τον υιον αυτης τον υιον αυτης τον πρωτοτοκον
27* 1291
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 2

1G    τον υιον αυτης πρωτοτοκον
888*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

2    υιον
01 03 035 1 33 788 1192 1582*
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 8

3    τον υιον αυτης
1182
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 1

4    τον υιον τον πρωτοτοκον
05C2 019
NUMBER OF WITNESSES: 2

Matt 1:24 διεγερθεις

     The prepositional prefix of διεγερθεις is removed to read simply εγερθεις in a few manuscripts (ℵ B C* Z 071 f1 205 pc), some of which reflect the same practice in 1:19. Bengel (Apparatus, 93), Wettstein (1:239), Griesbach (1:17), Tischendorf (7th ed., 1:4), and von Soden (2:3) all indicate that εγερθεις entered this place in a few manuscripts from chapter two, where it occurs four times (2:13, 14, 20, 21). Wettstein notes that the preposition δια stretches the meaning of the verb, as Matthew was accustomed to do elsewhere (cf., e.g., διακαθαριει in 3:12 and διεκωλυεν in 3:14), with the meaning that Joseph immediately rose from the bed, but not until he had considered everything maturely and composed himself to do the job. Bloomfield (GNT, 8) notes the abundant use of εγειρω in the NT and sees no reason why Matthew should not have used the compound διεγειρω merely once just as do Mark (4:39), Luke (8:24), and John (6:18), and Meyer (35) echoes the overarching text-critical principle that the less common compound form of the verb gave place to the very common simple form. Consequently, internal evidence strongly commends the authenticity of the compound διεγερθεις that preponderates in the consensus of all manuscripts. Cf. also the note on Matt 1:19.

Matt 1:22 του

As in Matt 2:15, a number of witnesses (ℵ B C D W Z Δ 071 f1.13 33 892vid pc), but still relatively few, omit the article του before κυριου. Consistent with the notion of editorial tampering due to the identical omission in similar witnesses in 2:15, Wettstein (1:238) suggests that scribes omitted it because they thought the expression υπο του κυριου δια του προφητου would flow more smoothly without it. It is also possible that scribes assimilated the phrase to the common usage of the OT or even nearby passages 1:20, 24; 2:13, 19, etc., where the article is missing. But NT authors and speakers need not to have held to this custom absolutely (cf., e.g., 9:38; Luke 1:6, 9; Acts 4:26 [from Psalm 2:2]). Griesbach (1:16), while calling the omission of the article here and in 2:15 "very old," similarly argues that scribes removed it so that the article would not occur twice on the same line; he furthermore reasons that there is "no probable reason why it should have been carried into all the remaining manuscripts in both places," and that "it is well-known that in general unlearned scribes, being too little accustomed to the genius and idioms of the Greek language, were more prone to omit than rashly to add the article."
     Recent studies on scribal habits soundly corroborate Griesbach's judgment, and thus the presence of the article as reflected in the vast consensus of all manuscripts is to be retained. Cf. James R. Royse, "Scribal Habits in the Transmission of New Testament Texts," in The Critical Study of Sacred Texts, ed. Wendy D. O'Flaherty (Berkeley: Graduate Theological Union, 1979), 139–61; idem, "Scribal Tendencies in the Transmission of the Text of the New Testament," in The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the Status Quaestionis (ed. Bart D. Ehrman and Michael W. Holmes; Studies and Documents 46; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 239–52; idem, Scribal Habits in Early Greek New Testament Papyri (Leiden: Brill, 2008); Peter M. Head, "Some Observations on Early Papyri of the Synoptic Gospels, Especially Concerning the 'Scribal Habits,'" Biblica 71 (1990): 240–47; idem, "The Habits of New Testament Copyists: Singular Readings in the Early Fragmentary Papyri of John," Biblica 85 (2004): 399–408; and Kyoung Shik Min, Die früheste Überlieferung des Matthäusevangeliums (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Textforschung 34; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2005), who says, "What is customary with the old papyri, and also remarkable, is that omissions are more than twice as likely to be found than additions" (97).

Matt 1:20 Μαριαμ

     A few scribes (B L f1 1241 pc co) altered Μαριαμ into Μαριαν, either in the interest of grammatical purism to denote the accusative case of the name, or by "mere error" (so Bloomfield, Annotations, 1) due to the similarity of the final consonants Μ and Ν not only in appearance but also in speech. But Matthew, as Bengel notes (Apparatus, 93), may well be imitating the Aramaic speech of the angel. See John 11:19, 28, 31, 45, where some of the same witnesses above reflect the opposite change, but where the consensus spelling Μαριαν is nevertheless corroborated by early papyri and other old manuscripts, and also Matt 1:24, where Matthäi (36) notes that before την γυναικα five manuscripts add Μαριαν and one Μαριαμ, indicating at least a scribal knowledge of if not even a preference for the so-called accusative form of the name in that place. Considering the relatively localized appearance of the support for Μαριαν, the above internal reasons, and the general reliability of the spelling of names reflected in the consensus of all manuscripts in other places, the spelling Μαριαμ is to be preferred. Cf. also the notes on Matt 1:5 (two), 7–8, 10, 13, 14, etc.

Matt 1:19 παραδειγματισαι

Three related witnesses (ℵ1 B Z) and one secondary witness (f1) have δειγματισαι while all the rest have παραδειγματισαι. Suggesting that alliteration between -δειγ- and the preceding δικαιος may have played a role in the omission of the prepositional prefix παρα, Bengel (Apparatus, 92) states that hasty scribes often omitted the conjoined preposition and gave the simple form of a verb, a circumstance Kühnöl (13) says is well-known and happens a hundred times over. Both Wettstein (1:233) and Griesbach (1:16) agree that παραδειγματισαι carried a worse connotation than δειγματισαι, and hence (so Wettstein) some ancient critics preferred the less harsh word since Mary was of such great excellence that even the thought of Joseph doing something harsher to her might have caused some to lessen their high view of her (or him). It matters little if the meanings of the two words are not really different (so Fritzsche), only that ancient scribes and critics thought they were different (leading one to correct the harsher word to the less harsh), and supporting this fact are many fathers and two scholia that Matthäi (34) quotes and says are "very ancient" and "without question" were assembled from Origen. Griesbach is more balanced but argues that while either reading may be seen as a gloss, in such cases one may more safely rest assured in the reading that is more numerous among the old and weighty witnesses (in this case including at least ℵ* E N P W Σ), and for this reason he says that παραδειγματισαι must be preferred. Fritzsche (41) likewise agrees that παραδειγματισαι is original on internal and external grounds, but rightly cautions against the notion that scribes universally changed the complex form of the verb into the simple form, suggesting instead that scribes would often prefer whichever form of the verb was more common to them, be it the simple or the complex form. Therefore, based on substantial external support for the complex form, παραδειγματισαι should be considered original, especially since the origin of the simple form is accounted for by internal and transcriptional reasons and its support is notably non-diverse.

Matt 1:18 γαρ

After μνηστευθεισης a few manuscripts (p1 ℵ B C* Z f1 pc) omit γαρ, but the strong consensus of over 1600 manuscripts combined with Eusebius in the fourth century, W/032 around 400, and representatives from all the text-types (L Θ Δ Π f13 33 892 1241) with the possible exception of the Western indicate that the presence of the conjunction here is older than its absence. Bengel (Gnomon, 1:110) comments that 1:18 contains the introductory statement of the matters that follow, to which also the ουτως refers, and thus the conjunction γαρ (as in Heb 2:8) commences the handling of the subject, which corresponds with the introductory statement. Furthermore, Griesbach (1:15) and Bloomfield (GNT, 1:6) rightly judge that γαρ was omitted by copyists who did not perceive its force and in some versions because in translation it could be disregarded without harming the sense. Burgon (Traditional Text, 192–3) flatly says that the γαρ "is not represented here in so much as a single ancient Version" because it is untranslatable in this sense, and that had it been a scribal addition to the text "it could not by any possibility have universally established itself in copies of the Gospel" to the extent that it has done due to its untranslatable function and thus, to scribes, apparent superfluousness. On the grounds of its overwhelming and relatively equally early external attestation, superior internal character, and sufficient explanation of its absence in a minority of witnesses the presence of γαρ is to be preferred.