Mark 15:1-5 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Mark

Chapter 15

---

 

1. και ευθεως[1] επι το[2] πρωι συμβουλιον ποιησαντες οι αρχιερεις μετα των πρεσβυτερων και γραμματεων και ολον το συνεδριον δησαντες τον ιησουν απηνεγκαν και παρεδωκαν τω[3] πιλατω And immediately, in the morning, the chief priests with the elders and scribes and the whole council held a consultation, bound Jesus, carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate.

2. και επηρωτησεν αυτον ο πιλατος συ ει ο βασιλευς των ιουδαιων ο δε αποκριθεις ειπεν[4] αυτω συ λεγεις And Pilate asked him, “Are you the King of the Jews?” And answering, he said to him, “You say it.”

3. και κατηγορουν αυτου οι αρχιερεις πολλα [αυτος δε ουδεν απεκρινατο] And the chief priests accused him of many things, [but he answered nothing][5].

4. ο δε πιλατος παλιν επηρωτησεν[6] αυτον λεγων ουκ αποκρινη ουδεν ιδε ποσα σου καταμαρτυρουσιν[7] And Pilate asked him again, saying “Do you answer nothing? Behold how many things they testify against you!”

5. ο δε ιησους ουκετι ουδεν απεκριθη ωστε θαυμαζειν τον πιλατον But Jesus still answered nothing, so that Pilate marveled.

---

[1] NA-Text reads “ευθυς”, same word spelled differently.

[2] NA-Text omits “επι το”, possibly due to a parabletic error (επι το πρωι, thus missing “επι το”).

[3] NA-Text omits “τω”, possibly due to a parabletic error (τω πιλατω, thus missing “τω”).

[4] NA-Text and Vg-St read “λεγει” (present instead of aorist, Latin equivalent: “ait”), which is supported by codices א, B, D, Θ and Bede. The aorist is supported by the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. Mark uses both forms. The evidence might suggest that there was a local adjustment in the Byzantine text, possibly to bring out the clause “you say it” by distinguishing its verb from the form of the preceding verb, but it is not conclusive. The Greek text remains unchanged.

[5] NA-Text, M-Text, WPF³⁵ and Vg-St omit “but he answered nothing”. From the first edition of the TR in 1516 until Beza’s revision in 1598, this clause had been absent from the text. Scrivener added it to the text in 1894. The omission is supported by codices א, B, D, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. The inclusion of the clause is supported by codices N, U, W, Δ, Θ, Ψ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 33, 565, 579, 1071, 1424, 2542^supp, the old Latin codices it^a and it^c, the Syriac Sinaiticus and some manuscripts of the Sahidic Coptic version. Inclusion by harmonization to Matthew 27:12 is not very likely because Matthew reads simply “ουδεν απεκρινατο” versus “αυτος δε ουδεν απεκρινατο” in Mark. Also, Matthew adds “chief priests” that has not been transferred to Mark. The evidence for the omission is strong, but it is hard to understand how the exact form of this clause appeared in Mark in majuscules of Byzantine, Alexandrian and Caesarean text types. Therefore, this clause has been bracketed in the Greek text and the translation. The Patriarchal Text retained this clause in the text. It is worth noting that the Greek text of the Complutensian Polyglot, which is Byzantine, included this clause, whereas the Latin text in the parallel column omitted it, following the vulgate.

[6] NA-Text and P-Text read “επηρωτα” (imperfect instead of aorist), which is supported by codices B, U, W, Ψ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 33, 565, 892, 1424 and a marginal note in the Harklean Syriac version. The TR is supported by codices א, A, C, D, Θ, 0250, family of manuscripts ƒ¹, the old Latin codices, the Byzantine manuscript, the Peshitta, the Harklean Syriac version and Theophylact. The support for the aorist is better. It is more likely that the “again” in verse 4 was meant to narrate that the second question was asked following the pattern of the first one in verse 2, which used the same verb “επηρωτησεν”. The Latin scriptures also make no distinction between those two verbs in verses 2 and 4. Therefore the text remains unchanged here.

[7] NA-Text and Vg-St read “κατηγορουσιν” (“accused” instead of “testify against”, Latin equivalent: “accusant”), which is supported by codices א, B and D. The TR is supported by codex Θ, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. This verb “accused” is likely a harmonization to the same verb in verse 3 when scribes concluded that Pilate should have used the same verb of the previous verse to keep the narrative consistent.

----

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. Vg-St: 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!