Matthew 22:34-40 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Matthew

Chapter 22

---

34. οι δε φαρισαιοι ακουσαντες οτι εφιμωσεν τους σαδδουκαιους συνηχθησαν επι το αυτο Now when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they assembled together. 35. και επηρωτησεν εις εξ αυτων νομικος πειραζων αυτον και λεγων And one of them, a lawyer[1], asked him a question, tempting him and saying[2], 36. διδασκαλε ποια εντολη μεγαλη εν τω νομω “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the law?” 37. ο δε ιησους εφη[3] αυτω αγαπησεις κυριον τον θεον σου εν ολη τη[4] καρδια σου και εν ολη τη ψυχη σου και εν ολη τη διανοια σου2 And Jesus[5] said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38. αυτη εστιν η[6] μεγαλη και πρωτη εντολη This is the great and first commandment. 39. δευτερα δε ομοια αυτη αγαπησεις τον πλησιον σου ως σεαυτον And the second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40. εν ταυταις ταις δυσιν εντολαις ολος ο νομος και οι προφηται κρεμανται[7] On these two commandments hang the whole law and the prophets.” [1] NA-Text brackets “lawyer”. The collective witness of the majuscules of all text-types, including codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the minuscules, the versions and the fathers is overwhelmingly against questioning this word as part of the text. [2] NA-Text and VgSt omit “and saying”. The omission is supported by codices א, B, L, minuscules 33 and 892* and the Bohairic Coptic version and Jerome. The Sahidic Coptic version is divided. The inclusion is supported by codices D, W, Θ, 0102, 0161vid, 0197, both family of manuscripts ƒ1 and ƒ13, the Byzantine minuscules, the old Latin codices, the middle Ӕgyptian Coptic and the Syriac versions, Chrysostom and Theophylact. This omission is supported mostly by Alexandrian manuscripts, which does not account for the whole witness coming from Egypt, which is an indication of rewording of the text at a very local level. Jerome certainly had access to at least one of those Egyptian manuscripts when he removed those 2 words from the Latin bible. It’s noteworthy that whenever Matthew used this verb to indicate that someone was going to ask a question and the question comes next, the question was invariably introduced by “saying” (see Matt. 12:10, 17:10, 22:23-24, 22:35, 22:41-42, 27:11). The omission of “saying” here is then likely the product of scribes missing it during the copying process. [3] NA-Text and M-Text read “εφη” instead of “ειπεν”, which is supported by codices א, B, D, L, 0102, 0161, 0197, family of manuscripts ƒ1, the Byzantine minuscules, minuscules 33 and 892, the old Latin codex itq, the Peshitta, the Harklean Syriac and the Coptic versions and Theophylact. The TR is supported by codices W, Θ, family of manuscripts ƒ13 and minuscule 700. The NA-Text and the M-Text are supported by a broad array of evidence. Therefore, the Greek text has been adjusted following them, even though this change does not affect translation. [4] M-Text omits the definite article “τη” before “heart” and again before “soul”. The omission of the article is supported by codices א*, B, E, F, G, H, U, V, W, Γ, Δ, Θ, 0102, 0107, 0161, family of manuscripts ƒ13, minuscules 28, 157, 700, 1241 and 1342 and the Byzantine minuscules. The inclusion is supported by codices אc, D, L, Z, K, M, S, Y, Π, family of manuscripts ƒ1, minuscules 33, 565, 892 and 1424 and Theophylact. The addition of the articles based on a theoretical harmonization with Deuteronomy 6:5 in the LXX, Mark 12:30,33 or Luke 10:27 is not very likely because in all those texts the Greek is “εξ ολης της καρδιας” from which there is no trace in Matthew. Also, because the article behind “mind” is certain, it would have been very odd for the author of this gospel to omit the article behind “heart” and “soul” only, and not “mind” given that “heart”, “soul” and “mind” are all built with “εν ολη”. On the other hand, to propose a parableptic error (εν ολη τη καρδια, thus missing “τη”) is also not very likely because there is no variant in 9:31 and 24:14 where the very same construction “εν ολη τη” is used. If there was such a tendency to miss this article by parablepsis, having happened twice in a single verse, we would expect to see the same variation also in 9:31 and 24:14. All we can say is that whatever might have taken place, the omission of the article is in all likelihood a scribal error because there are 16 occurrences of the word heart in Matthew and in all cases (nominative, genitive and dative) there was always a definite article accompanying the noun (5:8, 5:28, 6:21, 9:4, 11:29, 12:34, 12:40, 13:15, 13:19, 15:8, 15:18-19, 18:35, 22:37 and 24:48) so that the omission of the article here, in whatever strong combination of text-types it may be found, has not likely come from Matthew’s pen. [5] NA-Text omits “Jesus”. [6] NA-Text adds the definite article “η” before “great”. This article has been added following the transposition and wording in the NA-text, which is harder and more widespread. [7] NA-Text and Vg-St read “κρεμαται” (verb in the third person singular instead of plural, Latin: “pendet” in the same order of the Alexandrian text with this verb placed after “law”). The singular is supported by codices א, B, D, L, Z, Θ, minuscule 33, the Curetonian Syriac, the Ethiopic version, Augustine (City of God, Book 10, Ch. 5) and Jerome. The plural is supported by codices Γ, Δ, Π, Clement of Alexandria (The instruction, 3:12:3), the Diatessaron, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. Both forms are well supported and have been preserved in the church, one in the Latin and the other in the Greek church. Also, both readings are compatible with Matthew’s style, once he can connect the verb in the singular with the law and separate the prophets from the verb (Matt. 7:2) or amalgamate the law and the prophets under the same subject with a verb in the plural referring to them collectively (Matt. 11:13). We cannot go any further because this verse is unique to the gospel of Matthew. And we don’t need to because the meaning of this verse remains the same with this verb either in the singular or in the plural.

----

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. VgSt: Vulgate of Stuttgart;  

7. WPF³⁵: Wilbur Pickering-family 35;

8. PT: Patriarchal Text, also known as Patriarchal Greek New Testament, published by the ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

9. 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!