Mark 3:22-30 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Mark

Chapter 3

---

22. και οι γραμματεις οι απο ιεροσολυμων καταβαντες ελεγον οτι βεελζεβουλ εχει και οτι εν τω αρχοντι των δαιμονιων εκβαλλει τα δαιμονια And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, “He has Beelzebul,” and, “By the prince of demons he casts out the demons.”

23. και προσκαλεσαμενος αυτους εν παραβολαις ελεγεν αυτοις πως δυναται σατανας σαταναν εκβαλλειν And summoning them, he spoke to them in parables, “How can Satan cast out Satan?

24. και εαν βασιλεια εφ εαυτην μερισθη ου δυναται σταθηναι η βασιλεια εκεινη And if a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.

25. και εαν οικια εφ εαυτην μερισθη ου δυναται[1] σταθηναι η οικια εκεινη And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

26. και ει ο σατανας ανεστη εφ εαυτον και μεμερισται[2] ου δυναται σταθηναι[3] αλλα τελος εχει And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end.

27. [4] δυναται ουδεις τα σκευη του ισχυρου εισελθων εις την οικιαν αυτου διαρπασαι εαν μη πρωτον τον ισχυρον δηση και τοτε την οικιαν αυτου διαρπασει[5] [6] No one can enter the house of the strong man to plunder unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house.

28. αμην λεγω υμιν οτι παντα αφεθησεται τα αμαρτηματα τοις υιοις των ανθρωπων και αι[7] βλασφημιαι οσας αν[8] βλασφημησωσιν “Truly I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men and blasphemies with which they may blaspheme,

29. ος δ αν βλασφημηση εις το πνευμα το αγιον ουκ εχει αφεσιν εις τον αιωνα αλλ[9] ενοχος εστιν αιωνιου κρισεως but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation[10].”

30. οτι ελεγον πνευμα ακαθαρτον εχει For they were saying, “He has an unclean spirit.”

---

[1] NA-Text and VgSt read “δυνησεται” (future instead of present, Latin equivalent: “poterit”). The future is supported by codices א, B and Bede. The present is supported by codices D, Θ, the Byzantine minuscules and Theophylact. Internal evidence suggests that the present is a conformation to the present form of this verb found in verses 24, 26 and 27, but the external support from Greek manuscripts appears to be local only. So, it is not safe to adopt this reading in the text.

[2] NA-Text reads “εμερισθη” (perfect instead of aorist).

[3] NA-Text reads “στηναι” (second aorist active instead of aorist passive).

[4] M-Text omits “ου”. The omission is supported by codices A, D, L, W, Θ, 0133, 0134, both families of manuscripts ƒ¹ and ƒ¹³, minuscules 28, 33, 700, 892, the Byzantine minuscules and Theophylact. The inclusion is supported by codices א, B, C and Δ. The omission has a better support and has been adopted in the Greek text.

[5] NA-Text adds “But”.

[6] M-Text reads “διαρπαση”. The TR is supported by codices א, B, D (misspelled: διαρπαζει), Θ and Theophylact. The TR spelling is very well supported and does not need correction.

[7] NA-Text adds a definite article before “blasphemies”. The inclusion is supported by codices א, A, B and Θ. The omission is supported by codices D, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. The omission could be the result of a scribal error caused by parablepsis (και αι βλασφημιαι, thus missing the definite article). On the other hand, it could also be a natural scribal addition. Mark wrote “blasphemies” in 2:7 without the article and included the article in 14:64 in which it was expected that an article would have been included as opposed to Mark 2:7. The parallel passage in Matt. 12:31 lacks the article both before sin and blasphemy, but the construction is different with both nouns in the singular. Therefore, the article has been added to the text here.

[8] NA-Text reads “οσα εαν”.

[9] NA-Text reads “αλλα”.

[10] Or “sin” (NA-Text). VgSt reads “delicti”, which is closer to "sin" than "condemnation". "Sin" is supported by codices א, B, C*^vid, D, L, W, Δ, Θ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 28, 33, 565, 826^c, 892*, 2427 and 2737, 9 old Latin codices, some manuscripts of the Sahidic Coptic version, (the Georgian version), the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Gothic, the Armenian, the Georgian¹, Athanasius, Cyprian, Augustine and Bede. The Bohairic Coptic version is divided. “Condemnation” is supported by codices A, C², E, F, G, H, K, Π, Σ, 074, 0134, family of manuscripts ƒ¹, minuscules 124, 157, 180, 205, 517, 597, 700, 892^c, 954, 1006, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1230, 1241, 1242, 1253, 1292, 1342, 1344, 1365, 1424, 1505, 1646 and 2148, the Byzantine minuscules, 2 old Latin codices, the Peshitta, the Harklean Syriac, the Ethiopic, the Slavic, the Georgian² version, the Diatessaron and Theophylact. The support for the Alexandrian text is slightly better when it comes to how widespread the reading is. But apart from a few exceptions, the Byzantine tradition is very strong on “subject to an eternal condemnation”. Only 0.7% of the Greek manuscripts read “subject to an eternal sin”. Also, the fact that the vulgate has “peccata” in verse 28 and “delicti” in verse 29 diminishes the strength of the Alexandrian text because this is an indication that what has been preserved in the Latin church is not exactly what is found in the NA-Text. A few manuscripts read “κολασεως”, which is certainly closer to “condemnation” than "sin”. Once the previous verse mentions the very same word for “sin”, it is plausible to think that scribes imported that word into this verse, turning “condemnation” into “sin”, possibly concerned with the idea that only this sin makes one liable to eternal condemnation, thus suggesting some sort of conditional immortality, which would have been contrary to orthodoxy and possibly indicating to them that "condemnation" could have been a scribal error in their copies. On the other hand, “eternal sin” in the Alexandrian text or “eternal transgression” in the vulgate are fully compatible with the parallel passage in Matt. 12:32. Therefore, both variants are viable.

----

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!