The gospel according to Matthew
Chapter 24
|
15. οταν ουν ιδητε το
βδελυγμα της ερημωσεως το ρηθεν δια δανιηλ του προφητου εστως[1] εν
τοπω αγιω ο αναγινωσκων νοειτω “Therefore, when you see the abomination of
desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the
holy place (let the reader understand), |
|
16. τοτε οι εν τη ιουδαια
φευγετωσαν επι[2] τα
ορη then let those who are in Judea flee to the
mountains. |
|
17. ο επι του δωματος μη
καταβαινετω[3] αραι
τα[4] εκ
της οικιας αυτου Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. |
|
18. και ο εν τω αγρω μη
επιστρεψατω οπισω αραι το ιματιον[5] αυτου And let him who is in the field not turn back to take
his cloak. |
|
19. ουαι δε ταις εν γαστρι
εχουσαις και ταις θηλαζουσαις εν εκειναις ταις ημεραις But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who
are nursing babies in those days! |
|
20. προσευχεσθε δε ινα μη
γενηται η φυγη υμων χειμωνος μηδε [6]
σαββατω And pray that your flight may not be in the winter
nor on a Sabbath, |
|
21. εσται γαρ τοτε θλιψις
μεγαλη οια ου γεγονεν απ αρχης κοσμου εως του νυν ουδ ου μη γενηται for then there will be great tribulation, such as
has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever will be. |
|
22. και ει μη εκολοβωθησαν
αι ημεραι εκειναι ουκ αν εσωθη πασα σαρξ δια δε τους εκλεκτους κολοβωθησονται
αι ημεραι εκειναι And if those days had not been shortened, no flesh
would have been saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be
shortened. |
|
23. τοτε εαν τις υμιν ειπη
ιδου ωδε ο χριστος η ωδε μη πιστευσητε “Then if anyone tells you, ‘Behold, here is the
Christ!’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it. |
|
24. εγερθησονται γαρ
ψευδοχριστοι και ψευδοπροφηται και δωσουσιν σημεια μεγαλα και τερατα ωστε
πλανησαι ει δυνατον και τους εκλεκτους For false christs and false prophets will arise, and
they will show great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible,
even the elect. |
|
25. ιδου προειρηκα υμιν “Behold, I have told you beforehand. |
|
26. εαν ουν ειπωσιν υμιν
ιδου εν τη ερημω εστιν μη εξελθητε ιδου εν τοις ταμειοις μη πιστευσητε “Therefore, if they say to you, ‘Behold, he is in
the wilderness,’ do not go out; or ‘Behold, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not
believe it. |
|
27. ωσπερ γαρ η αστραπη
εξερχεται απο ανατολων και φαινεται εως δυσμων ουτως εσται η παρουσια του
υιου του ανθρωπου For as the lightning comes from the east and shines
to the west, so [7] will be the coming of the
Son of Man. |
|
28. οπου γαρ εαν η το πτωμα εκει συναχθησονται οι αετοι For[8] wherever the carcass is,
there the vultures will be gathered together. |
[1] NA-Text reads “εστος”, same verbal tense spelled
differently.
[2] NA-Text reads “εις” (“into” instead of “to
(-ward)”).
[3] NA-Text reads “καταβατω” (second aorist instead of
present).
[4] NA-Text, M-Text, WPF35
and the PT read “τα”, which is supported by
codices א2, B, W, family of manuscripts ƒ13, the Byzantine minuscules,
Chrysostom and Theophylact. The TR is supported by codices D, Θ, family
of manuscripts ƒ1, minuscules 28, 33, 565,
700, 1424 and Origen. The six last words of this verse are identical with Mark
13:15, when read with “τι”. The fact that this word in the TR is supported only by secondary
codices and reading the same as the parallel passage in Mark, makes scribal
harmonization almost certain. It is safer then, to follow the reading in the
majority text and the NA-Text in this case. So, the Greek text has been
adjusted accordingly.
[5] NA-Text reads “το ιματιον” (singular of “garments”).
[6] NA-Text, M-Text, WPF35
and the PT omit “εν”, which is supported by codices א, B, D, L, Θ, 094, the Byzantine minuscules and Theophylact. The TR is supported by codices E, F,
0133, minuscules 28 and 1424 and Chrysostom. This last clause is wanting in the
parallel passage in Mark 13:18. The addition is confined to a stream of the
Byzantine text, which is less likely to have preserved the original. Therefore,
the omission has been adopted into the Greek text here.
[7] NA-Text and M-Text (Hodges-Farstad text only) omit
“also”. The omission is supported by codices א, B, D, part of the Byzantine minuscules, the Diatessaron and
Theophylact. The inclusion is supported by codices W, Θ, family of manuscripts ƒ13, the
majority of the Byzantine minuscules, Jerome and Chrysostom. “So also will be
the coming of the Son of Man” is repeated verbatim in verses 37 and 39. The
Peshitta and the Coptic versions support the omission in both verses 37 and 39.
Codex B and the Diatessaron support the omission in all three verses. Codex D
supports the inclusion only in verse 37 and codex א only in verse 39. On the other hand, the Majority text (Robinson-Pierpont text) includes “also” in all
three instances and so does Chrysostom, Jerome, the vulgate of Stuttgart
(Latin: “ita erit et adventus Filii hominis”),
the Patriarchal text and Wilbur Pickering-family 35. Codices W, Θ, 067, both families of
manuscripts ƒ1 and ƒ13, the
Harklean Syriac version and Theophylact support the inclusion of “also” only in
verses 37 and 39. So, the Byzantine and the Caesarean texts plus the Latin
version support the inclusion of “also” in verses 37 and 39. The Western text
and the Alexandrian text are divided supporting just one of the verses. Based
on the evidence, we can think of two possible scenarios: 1) Homoeoteleuton
created an instability in verses 37 and 39, which caused the loss of one “also”
(εσται και, thus missing “also”). Scribes then noticing
that the phrases were the same in verses 37 and 39 dropped the second “also” to
harmonize verse 37 with 39, noticing that verse 27 did not have “also” in their
copies, which resulted in the omission of all three of them in codex B and the
Diatessaron; 2) The Byzantine and the Caesarean texts harmonized verses 37 and
39 with the parallel passage in Luke 17:26 without importing any other
difference from Luke whose wording is different and the passage is in another
context. Besides, the vulgate that normally reflects the Alexandrian and
Western texts, departed this time from its base texts to import “also” from the
parallel passage in Luke like the Byzantine and the Caesarean texts. This second
scenario, it seems to me, is extremely unlikely because everybody would have to
have the same idea in three different locations to surgically import just one
element from the parallel passage in Luke and none of the other differences. For
this reason, it is easier to think of a visual instability in the text going
from the longer to the shorter text with transitional texts in between like we
see in codices א and D. With that all in mind, returning to verse
27, we learn that the external support for the omission of “also” here is very
good and this omission helps explaining why codex B and the Diatessaron ended
up omitting all three occurrences of “also” by harmonization with this verse
that lacked “also” in the original copy and then the suggestion to scribes that
just one “also” in verses 37 or 39 after the missing one caused by parablepsis
must not be correct and should be dropped from the text. Lastly, Matthew’s
writing style allows for the omission of “also” when using the pair “ωσπερ / ουτως
εσται” (for as / so will be) once he omitted the “και”
(also) after “ουτως εσται” in Matt. 12:40 and 13:40. Therefore, in this
scenario, being the most probable in accounting for all rival readings, the
Greek text has been adjusted to the majority text of Hodges-Farstad as to the
inclusion/exclusion of “also” in verses 27, 37 and 39.
[8] NA-Text and Vg-St omit “for”. This omission is supported by codices א, B, D, L, Θ, family of manuscripts ƒ1, minuscules 33, 700, 892, the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Peshitta and the Sahidic and Bohairic Coptic versions and Jerome. The inclusion is supported by codex W, family of manuscripts ƒ13, the Byzantine manuscripts, 3 old Latin codices (itc, itff2 and itq), the Harklean Syriac, the middle Egyptian Coptic version, Chrysostom and Theophylact. The text in the parallel passage in Luke 17:37 does not have this conjunction but mainly because the disciples had asked there “Where Lord” and then Jesus answers “Wherever the body is…”. The omission of the conjunction then could have been imported from the parallel passage, but due to the fact that the texts are different in those two passages and there’s no hint of the other elements of the Lukan passage in Matthew, this possibility is not very likely. Another possibility is insertion of the conjunction from the previous verse, accidental or intentional to make the verse flow better. Omission to avoid repetition of the same conjunction is also possible. The level of attestation for the Alexandrian reading is excellent though. This is a strong variant.
----
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!
No comments:
Post a Comment