Luke 6:1-5 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Luke

Chapter 6

---

 

1. εγενετο δε εν σαββατω δευτεροπρωτω[1] διαπορευεσθαι αυτον δια [2] σποριμων και ετιλλον οι μαθηται αυτου τους σταχυας και ησθιον ψωχοντες ταις χερσιν Now it happened on the second Sabbath after the first that he was going through the grain fields. And his disciples plucked the heads of grain and were eating, rubbing them in their hands.

2. τινες δε των φαρισαιων ειπον[3] αυτοις τι ποιειτε ο ουκ εξεστιν ποιειν εν[4] τοις σαββασιν But some of the Pharisees said to them[5], “Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day?”

3. και αποκριθεις προς αυτους ειπεν ο ιησους ουδε τουτο ανεγνωτε ο εποιησεν δαυιδ οποτε[6] επεινασεν αυτος και οι μετ αυτου οντες[7] And Jesus, answering them, said, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him,

4. ως[8] εισηλθεν εις τον οικον του θεου και τους αρτους της προθεσεως ελαβεν και[9] εφαγεν και εδωκεν και[10] τοις μετ αυτου ους ουκ εξεστιν φαγειν ει μη μονους τους ιερεις how he entered the house of God and took and ate the showbread, and gave also to those who were with him, which is not lawful to eat except for the priests alone?”

5. και ελεγεν αυτοις οτι[11] κυριος εστιν ο υιος του ανθρωπου και του σαββατου And he said to them, “The Son of Man is also[12] Lord of the Sabbath.”

---

[1] NA-Text omits “δευτεροπρωτω” (the second after the first). The collective witness of majuscules of all-text types, the vast majority of the minuscules and the fathers is unmistakenly against this omission. The Diatessaron should  not be quoted as an early witness outside of the Alexandrian transmission line for this omission once Tatian used Matthew 12:1 instead of Luke 6:1 in the Diatessaron. It is virtually impossible that scribes in all those different transmission lines and the Latin scriptures (secundoprimo) would have had the same idea of making up the same word that appears nowhere in the New Testament and the Septuagint. The word was dropped in the Alexandrian transmission line precisely because scribes were not familiar with it and because they could not find it in the parallel passages in Matthew 12:1 and Mark 2:23.

[2] NA-Text omits the definite article “των”, which is supported by codices א, A, B and Θ. The inclusion is supported by codex D, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. This is probably a natural addition to the text. The definite article has been removed from the Greek text.

[3] NA-Text reads “ειπαν”. Same verbal tense spelled differently.

[4] NA-Text reads “ειπαν”. Same verbal tense spelled differently.

[5] NA-Text and Vg-St omit “ποιειν εν”, which is supported by papyri 4 and 75^vid, codices B, D, minuscule 700, the old Latin codices it^a, it^aur, it^b, it^c, it^d, it^e, it^f, it^ff2, it^l and it^r1, the Sahidic Coptic version, some manuscripts of the Bohairic Coptic version, the Armenian and the Georgian version. The Diatessaron should not be cited as a witness for the omission once Tatian used Mark 2:24 that omits the second occurrence of “to do”. The inclusion is supported by codices א, A, C, K, L, W, X, Δ, Θ, Π, Ψ, both families of manuscripts ƒ¹ and ƒ¹³, minuscules 28, 33, 565, 892, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1241, 1242, 1253, 1344, 1365, 1546, 1646, 2148 and 2174, the Byzantine manuscripts, the old Latin codex it^q, the Peshitta, the Harklean Syriac, the Palestinian Syriac, the Bohairic Coptic, the Gothic, the Ethiopic version and Theophylact. The support for the inclusion is better. The omission of the verb is possibly due to a scribal error caused by visual homoeuteleuton (εξεστιν ποιειν εν, thus missing “to do” and the preposition).

[6] NA-Text reads “οτε”. “οποτε” occurs only 7 times in the Septuagint and only here in the New Testament. Scribes probably replaced this rare word with “οτε” found in the parallel passages in Matthew 12:3 and Mark 2:25. The Byzantine and the Caesarean texts have preserved the harder reading.

[7] NA-Text brackets “οντες”. The omission is probably due to harmonization to the parallel passages in Matthew 12:3 and Mark 2:25.

[8] NA-Text brackets “ως”.

[9] NA-Text reads “λαβων” and omits “και”, thus rendering “and taking, ate”.

[10] NA-Text and Vg-St omit “και” (also). The omission is supported by codices B, L, W, Ψ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹, minuscule 205, the old Latin codices ita, it^aur, it^b, (it^c), (it^e), itf, it^ff2, it^l, it^q and it^r1, the Peshitta, the Sahidic Coptic, the Gothic, the Armenian, the Ethiopic^TH, the Georgian, the Slavic version, Irenaeus^lat, Ambrose and Theophylact. The Palestinian Syriac version is divided. The inclusion is supported by codices א, A, D, E, H, K, X, Δ, Θ, Π, 0233, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 28, 33, 157, 180, 565, 579, 597, 892, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1241, 1242, 1243, 1253, 1292, 1342, 1344, 1365, 1424, 1505, 1546, 1646, 2148 and 2174, the Byzantine manuscripts, the old Latin codex it^d, the Harklean Syriac, the Bohairic Coptic version, the Ethiopic^pp version. The parallel passage in Matthew 12:4 omits it, Mark 2:26 includes it. External evidence is better on the Byzantine side, but still very strong on the Alexandrian side. The conjunction remained in the text.

[11] NA-Text omits “οτι”.

[12] NA-Text omits “also”. The inclusion of the conjunction is supported by papyrus 4^vid, majuscules of all text-types, all minuscules except 1241, the Sahidic Coptic version and the Latin codices. It is wrong to cite the Diatessaron as a witness for the omission since Tatian added Matthew 12:8 in the harmony, which lacks the conjunction.

----

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!