Matthew 19:16-30 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Matthew

Chapter 19

---

16. Καὶ ἰδοὺ, εἷς προσελθὼν εἶπεν αὐτῷ,[1] Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ, τί ἀγαθὸν ποιήσω, ἵνα ἔχω[2] ζωὴν αἰώνιον; And behold, coming near, one said to him, “Good teacher[3], what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?”

17. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; Οὐδεὶς ἀγαθός, εἰ μὴ εἷς, ὁ Θεός. Εἰ δὲ θέλεις εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν ζωήν, τήρησον τὰς ἐντολάς. And he said to him, “Why do you call me good? [4] No one is good but one, that is, God[5]. But if you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18. Λέγει αὐτῷ, Ποίας; Ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, Τὸ Οὐ φονεύσεις, Οὐ μοιχεύσεις, Οὐ κλέψεις, Οὐ ψευδομαρτυρήσεις, He said to him, “Which ones?” Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder.’ ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ ‘You shall not steal.’ ‘You shall not bear false witness.’

19. Τίμα τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα, καὶ Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. ‘Honor [6] father and mother.’  And, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’”

20. Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ νεανίσκος, Πάντα ταῦτα ἐφυλαξάμην[7] ἐκ νεότητός μου, Τί ἔτι ὑστερῶ; The young man said to him, “All these I have kept from my youth[8]. What do I still lack?”

21. Ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Εἰ θέλεις τέλειος εἶναι, ὕπαγε, πώλησόν σου τὰ ὑπάρχοντα καὶ δὸς [9] πτωχοῖς, καὶ ἕξεις θησαυρὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ,[10] καὶ δεῦρο ἀκολούθει μοι. Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

22. Ἀκούσας δὲ ὁ νεανίσκος τὸν λόγον ἀπῆλθεν λυπούμενος, ἦν γὰρ ἔχων κτήματα πολλά. But when the young man heard this word, he went away sad, for he had many possessions.

23. Ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι δυσκόλως πλούσιος εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. And Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I say to you that a rich man will hardly enter the kingdom of heaven.

24. Πάλιν δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, εὐκοπώτερόν ἐστιν κάμηλον διὰ τρυπήματος ῥαφίδος διελθεῖν ἢ πλούσιον εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν. And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

25. Ἀκούσαντες δὲ οἱ μαθηταὶ ἐξεπλήσσοντο σφόδρα, λέγοντες, Τίς ἄρα δύναται σωθῆναι; When the[11] disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?”

26. Ἐμβλέψας δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Παρὰ ἀνθρώποις τοῦτο ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν, παρὰ δὲ θεῷ πάντα δυνατά [12] But looking at them, Jesus said, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

27. Τότε ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἰδοὺ, ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν πάντα καὶ ἠκολουθήσαμέν σοι. Τί ἄρα ἔσται ἡμῖν; Then answering, Peter said to him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?”

28. Ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ὑμεῖς οἱ ἀκολουθήσαντές μοι, ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ, ὅταν καθίσῃ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπὶ θρόνου δόξης αὐτοῦ, καθήσεσθε[13] καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐπὶ δώδεκα θρόνους κρίνοντες τὰς δώδεκα φυλὰς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you that you who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on the throne of his glory, you also will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

29. Καὶ πᾶς ὅς[14] ἀφῆκεν οἰκίας ἢ ἀδελφοὺς ἢ ἀδελφὰς ἢ πατέρα ἢ μητέρα ἢ γυναῖκα ἢ τέκνα ἢ ἀγροὺς, ἕνεκεν τοῦ ὀνόματός μου, ἑκατονταπλασίονα λήψεται[15] και ζωην αιωνιον κληρονομησει And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife[16] or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive one hundredfold and will inherit eternal life.

30. Πολλοὶ δὲ ἔσονται πρῶτοι ἔσχατοι καὶ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι. But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.

---

[1] NA-Text places the pronoun before the verb “to say” and renders “and coming to him, one said”. Both are compatible with Matthew’s writing style.

[2] NA-Text reads “σχω” (aorist instead of present).

[3] NA-Text omits “good”: א B D L ƒ¹ 22 565 892* 1010 1365 l5 it^a it^d it^e it^ff1 cop^bo(pt) eth^ro eth^pp geo¹ Pseudo-Origen^1/2? Hilary | TR: C E F G H K W Δ Θ Σ ƒ¹³ 28 33 118 157 180 205 565 579 597 700 892mg 1006 1009 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1243 1253 1292 1342 1344 1424 1505 1546 1646 2148 2174 Byz it^aur it^b it^c it^f it^ff2 it^g1 it^h it^l it^q it^r1 vg syr^c syr^s syr^p syr^h syr^pal cop^sa cop^mae cop^bo(pt) arm ethms eth^TH geo² slav Diatessaron^a (Diatessaron^syr) Diatessaronⁱ Diatessaronⁿ Marcus^{according to Irenaeus} Justin Clement Pseudo-Origen^1/2? Juvencus Basil Cyril-Jerusalem Chrysostom^lem Jerome (Latin: “Magister bone, quid bone faciam, ut habeam vitam aeternam”) Vigilius-Thapsus (Against Varimadus, Ch. 19) Theophylact || Origen is cited as a witness in the apparatus for the omission, but his commentary on Matthew is not extant after Matthew 19:11 and I did not find any quote in his works from Matthew 19:16. Wieland Willker suggests that this is possibly a quote from pseudo-Origen. The Diatessaron should not be cited as a witness for the inclusion because Tatian’s text is from Mark 10:17. Clement of Alexandria supports the inclusion (Gr.: “διδασκαλε αγαθε τι αγαθον ποιησω ινα ζωην αιωνιον χληρονομησο”, who is the rich men that shall be saved, Ch. 4). This double good-good in only found in Matthew. Chrysostom read: “διδασκαλε αγαθε τι ποιησω ινα ζωην αιωνιον χληρονομησο” (homily 63), which is not exactly how our texts read today, but he can be legitimately considered a witness for the inclusion of good in the gospel of Matthew. Scrivener well observes that Tischendorf and Tregelles have against them the strength of a passage that is well supported by “the great mass of Greek manuscripts, headed by C, is well supported by the versions and even better by ecclesiastical writers” (A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, pg. 575). Harmonization to Mark 10:17 and Luke 18:18 is less likely because we see no trace of the “running and kneeling” of Mark and the identification of the man as a “ruler” found in Luke. Besides, the question “why do you call me good” in verse 17 would have been non-sensical, if no one had called him good in the previous verse. And the next statement shows that at the very least part of the conversation revolves around a person, not just a good thing. Matthew’s ability to narrate facts coherently must also factor into textual decisions. The “αγαθε” might have been missed by homoeoteleuton (διδασκαλε αγαθε, thus missing “good”) or due to a scribal misunderstanding of the repetition of similar words “αγαθε” and “αγαθον” in the same sentence.

[4] Or: “why do you ask me about what is good” (NA-Text and Vg-St): א B D L Θ ƒ¹ 22 700 892* 1192* 1424^mg it^a it^aur it^b it^c it^d it^e (it^ff1) it^ff2 it^g1 it^h it^l it^r1 arm geo syrc syrpal copmae copbo Origen Jerome Augustine | TR: C E F G H K W Δ Σ ƒ¹³ 28 33 118 157 180 205 565 (579) 1006 1009 1010 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1243 1253 1342 1344 1365 1424 1505 1546 1582^c 1646 2148 2174 Byz it^f it^q syr^p syr^h cop^sa cop^bo(mss) slav Hilary Chrysostom Theophylact || The Clementine vulgate and the vulgate of Stuttgart consistently preserved the Alexandrian reading whereas the Byzantine compilations M-Text, WPF³⁵ and the P-Text agree unanimously around the “why do you call me good”. The Byzantine reading here is displaying possible signs of scribal harmonization to the parallel passages in Mark 10:18 and Luke 18:19 that may possibly have happened through copies of the Diatessaron that follows the sequence Mk 10:18-19 and Matt. 19:17-18. Tregelles stressed too much the fact that this reading is supported by Origen in the 200’s (which is possibly a pseudo-Origen), but the fact that the Sahidic Coptic version supports the Byzantine reading shows that this reading is not widespread in Egypt and that the Byzantine reading is also early. He also insists that the Curetonian Syriac is earlier than the Peshitta. But if the Curetonian Syriac version is a witness in the fourth century, so is also Chrysostom and Hilary. So, we find that the Byzantine reading is widespread and early. Also, good minuscules of different text types like 33, 157, 565, 579, 1071, 1241, 1342 and 1505 in agreement with the Byzantine reading is another piece of evidence showing that the Byzantine reading sprang up from one common source, which is possibly the original one. This variant does not prove his point that the Alexandrian reading is always to be preferred over “the whole mass of corrupt Byzantine documents of every kind”, but only that this particular variant is strong and viable here.

[5] NA-Text omits “that is, God”.

[6] NA-Text, M-Text, WPF³⁵, P-Text and Vg-St omit “your”. א B D Θ Byz Hilary | TR: Jerome Theophylact || The Diatessaron and the Clementine vulgate added pronouns for father and mother. The supported for the omission is excellent and has been adopted in the Greek text.  

[7] NA-Text reads “εφυλαξα” (active instead of middle voice).

[8] NA-Text and Vg-St omit “from my youth”. The vulgate of Stuttgart does not appear to be reflecting well the Latin tradition here for 9 old Latin codices support this inclusion including it^a, it^b, it^c, it^d (from youth), it^e, it^f, it^ff2, it^h, itⁿ and it^q, Ambrose, Hilary and Augustine. The Clementine vulgate included this qualifier. Cyprian and 4 old Latin codices did not. Jerome is cited in the apparatus as a witness for the non-inclusion but this is incorrect. He is rather a witness for the inclusion of (Latin: Omnia haec custodivi a juventute mea, commentary on Matt. 19:20). The non-inclusion is supported by codices א*, B, L, Θ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹, minuscules 22, 579 and 700, but codex Sinaiticus was corrected in the 500’s or 600’s by including “from youth”, which is the reading in codex D. Origen in Egypt had the clause in disagreement with codex Θ and so did the Coptic versions, the Alexandrian codex C and minuscule 33. The Byzantine reading is also supported by codices E, F, G, H, O, W, Δ, Σ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 28, 157, 180, 205, 565, 597, 892, 1006, 1010, 1071, 1241, 1243, 1292, 1342, 1424, 1505, the Byzantine manuscripts, all the Syriac versions, the Armenian, the Ethiopic, the Georgian, the Slavic version, Chrysostom and Theophylact. The apparatus suggests a possible harmonization to Mark 10:20 in the Byzantine text, but this is not likely because the beginning of the verse reads differently. It replaces “him” by “teacher” and Mark lacks the question “What do I still lack?” at the end of the verse, which combined with a strong and widespread support for the inclusion of the qualifier, demonstrates that the non-inclusion is most likely a copyist error that affected a few copies, perhaps a scribal misunderstanding of the repetition of similar words “νεανισκος” and “νεοτητος” in the same sentence that is not found in Mark 10:20 or Luke 18:21.

[9] NA-Text adds in brackets the definite article in the dative before the poor “τοις”.

[10] NA-Text reads “heavens” (ουρανοις). Codex Sinaiticus agrees with the Byzantine reading here.

[11] NA-Text and Vg-St omit “his” and renders “the disciples”: א B C* D K L Z Δ Θ ƒ¹³ 33 565 579 700 892 it^a it^aur it^b it^c it^d it^e it^f it^ff2 it^g1 it^h it^l itⁿ it^q it^r1 syr^s syr^p syr^h syr^pal cop^sa cop^bo arm geo^B Hilary Jerome | TR: C W X ƒ¹ 28 1009 1010 1071 1216 1230 1241 1242 1253 1344 1365 1424 2174 Byz it^ff1 syr^c cop^mae eth geo¹ geo^A John-Damascus Theophylact || The pronoun was likely added here by accident due to the fact that “his disciples” occurs quite often in the gospels. Pronoun removed.

[12] NA-Text, WPF³⁵ and M-Text^RP omit the verb “εστιν”: א B Θ Byz^pt Chrysostom Theophylact | C^c D E F G H M Ω 157 556 1424 2358 Byz^pt || The verb was probably added when a scribe thought that something was missing to complete the supposed parallelism αδυνατον εστιν / δυνατον εστιν. The verb “εστιν” has then been removed from the end of the verse.   

[13] NA-Text reads “καθησεσθε”, same verbal tense in a different spelling: א B C D^c L W Δ Θ ƒ¹³ 28 Theophylact | TR: D* K Γ 33 565 700 892 1010 1241 1424 Chrysostom || The Alexandrian spelling is better supported and has been adopted in the Greek text.

[14] NA-Text reads “οστις”. Those are interchangeable in this context.

[15] NA-Text reads “λημψεται”, same verbal tense in different spellings. See footnote in Matthew 10:41.

[16] NA-Text omits “or wife”. The collective witness of the majuscules, including codex Sinaiticus and the minuscules are overwhelmingly against this omission. Chrysostom is cited in the apparatus as a witness for the omission, but this is incorrect. He is actually a witness for the inclusion of “or wife” (Gr.: η αδελφας, η πατερα, η μητερα, η γυναικα, η τεκνα…, Homily 64 on the gospel of Matthew.). This is probably the case of a parableptic error in codex B (η μητερα, η γυναικα, η τεκνα, thus missing “or wife”).

----

Notes:

1. Text in red letters are places where the original reading in the Textus Receptus has been revised and corrected;

2. The English translation used as a reference is the WEB brought to conformity as literal as possible to the Textus Receptus. The end product though is not the WEB or a revised WEB and it should not be called WEB. The content of this post is freely available to everyone and it is not supposed to be copyrighted;

3. TR: Textus Receptus. This text is not copyrighted;

4. NA-Text: Nestle-Aland text commonly known as critical text;

5. M-Text: Majority Text; 

6. M-Text^RP - Majority Text compiled by Maurice Robinson & William Pierpont;

6. M-Text^HF - Majority Text compiled by Zane Hodges & Arthur Farstad; 

7. Vg-St: Vulgate of Stuttgart;  

8. WPF³⁵: Wilbur Pickering-family 35;

9. P-Text: Patriarchal Text, also known as Patriarchal Greek New Testament, published by the ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

10. The creator of the variant apparatus available in the VarApp kindly gave me permission to freely use the information contained in the material he put together.

 

---

To God all the glory for the preservation of the scriptures! He reigns!