Luke 9:28-36 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Luke

Chapter 9

---

28. εγενετο δε μετα τους λογους τουτους ωσει ημεραι οκτω και[1] παραλαβων [2] πετρον και ιωαννην και ιακωβον ανεβη εις το ορος προσευξασθαι Now it happened, about eight days after these sayings, that he took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray.

29. και εγενετο εν τω προσευχεσθαι αυτον το ειδος του προσωπου αυτου ετερον και ο ιματισμος αυτου λευκος εξαστραπτων And as he was praying, the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white.

30. και ιδου ανδρες δυο συνελαλουν αυτω οιτινες ησαν μωυσης[3] και ηλιας And behold, two men were talking with him, who were Moses and Elijah,

31. οι οφθεντες εν δοξη ελεγον την εξοδον αυτου ην εμελλεν[4] πληρουν εν ιερουσαλημ who appeared in glory and spoke of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.

32. ο δε πετρος και οι συν αυτω ησαν βεβαρημενοι υπνω διαγρηγορησαντες δε ειδον την δοξαν αυτου και τους δυο ανδρας τους συνεστωτας αυτω Now Peter and those who were with him were heavy with sleep, but when they were fully awake, they saw his glory, and the two men who stood with him.

33. και εγενετο εν τω διαχωριζεσθαι αυτους απ αυτου ειπεν ο[5] πετρος προς τον ιησουν επιστατα καλον εστιν ημας ωδε ειναι και ποιησωμεν σκηνας τρεις μιαν σοι και μιαν μωυσει και μιαν ηλια μη ειδως ο λεγει Then it happened, as they were parting from him, that Peter said to Jesus, “Master, it is good for us to be here; and let us make three tents: one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah,” not knowing what he said.

34. ταυτα δε αυτου λεγοντος εγενετο νεφελη και επεσκιασεν[6] αυτους εφοβηθησαν δε εν τω εκεινους[7] εισελθειν εις την νεφελην And as he was saying these things, a cloud came and overshadowed them, and they were afraid as they entered the cloud.

35. και φωνη εγενετο εκ της νεφελης λεγουσα ουτος εστιν ο υιος μου ο αγαπητος[8] αυτου ακουετε And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved Son. Listen to him!”

36. και εν τω γενεσθαι την φωνην ευρεθη ο[9] ιησους μονος και αυτοι εσιγησαν και ουδενι απηγγειλαν εν εκειναις ταις ημεραις ουδεν ων εωρακασιν[10] And when the voice came, Jesus was found alone. And they were silent and told no one in those days anything which they had seen.

---

[1] NA-Text brackets “και”.

[2] NA-Text, WPF³⁵ and M-text omit the definite article before the proper noun “Peter”, which is supported by codices א, B, D, Θ and Theophylact. The article “τον” evidently does not belong in the text. It has been removed, following the NA-text and the M-text.

[3] NA-Text and P-Text read “μωυσης”, which is supported by codices א, B, D and Θ. The TR is supported by the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. Contrary to Matthew and John, Luke was either a Greek or a Hellenistic Jew, so it would make more sense for him to use the Hellenized version of the proper name Moses over the other evangelists. Therefore, the Greek text has been adjusted following the NA-Text. The same correction will be applied to all occurrences of this proper noun in the gospel of Luke.

[4] NA-Text reads “ημελλεν”. Same verbal tense, different spelling (attic form).

[5] M-text omits the definite article “ο” before the proper noun “Peter”, which is supported by codices A, W, Γ, Θ, Ψ, minuscule 565 and the Byzantine manuscripts. The inclusion is supported by codices א, B, D, part of the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. The TR is well supported and does not need correction.

[6] NA-Text reads “επεσκιαζεν” (imperfect instead of aorist). The evidence reals that the imperfect is a local adjustment to the text. On the other hand, the aorist is widespread across all text types.

[7] NA-Text reads “αυτους”, placing it after the verb.

[8] Or: “εκλελεγμενος”, rendering “This is my Son, my chosen one” (Latin equivalent: “electus”, NA-Text and Vg-St read). The Clementine vulgate disagrees and reads “dilectus” (beloved). The Alexandrian reading is supported by papyri 45 and 75, codices א, B, L, Ξ, minuscules 579, 892, 1241 and 1342, the old Latin codices it^a, it^aur, it^ff2 and it^l, the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Sahidic Coptic, the Bohairic Coptic, the Armenian, the (Ethiopic) and a marginal note in the Harklean Syriac version. Codex Θ, minuscules 1 and 1365 read “εκλεκτος”, which can also be translated as “beloved one”. The TR is supported by codices A, C, D, E, G, H, K, P, W, X, Δ, Π, Ψ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 28, 33, 157, 180, 205, 565, 597, 700, 1006, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1242, 1243, 1253, 1292, 1344, 1424, 1505, 1546, 1646, 2148, 2174, the Byzantine manuscrips, the old Latin codices it^b, it^c, it^d, it^e, it^f, it^q, the Curetonian Syriac, the Peshitta, the Harklean Syriac, the Palestinian Syriac, the Gothic, the Georgian, the Slavic version, some manuscripts of the Bohairic Coptic version, Marcion^{according to Tertullian}, Marcion^{according to Epiphanius}, Tertullian, Ambrose, Cyril of Alexandria and Theophylact. The Arabic Diatessaron reads “this is my beloved Son, whom I have chosen”. The parallel passages in Matthew 17:5 and Mark 9:7 read “beloved Son”, which could point to harmonization in other transmission lines, but the issue is that the “beloved” is found in Alexandrian, Western, Byzantine and Caesarean texts and in the writings of Tertullian in 207/208 AD. Ambrose in the 300’s and Cyril in Alexandria also had the Byzantine reading, both commenting specifically on the gospel of Luke. So, if there was harmonization, it happened not only in the Byzantine text, but in all transmission lines. “His chosen one” in Luke 23:35 is not a parallel passage and is written after “the Christ of God”, which cannot explain the Alexandrian reading. It is possible that it was created under the influence of the Diatessaron. But again, the conflation in the Diatessaron must have a source and it is possible that Tatian combined the “beloved Son” of Mark with “the chosen one” of Luke. The “ο εκλεκτος” in Isaiah 42:1 in the Septuagint can explain the reading in codex Θ, but not the participle in the Alexandrian text, unless it started with “ο εκλεκτος” and then it was changed into the participle “ο εκλελεγμενος” as the copying process went on. If the Alexandrian reading is original, then we must assume that the voice from heaven said “this is my beloved Son, the chosen one, in whom I am well pleased” and that just part of this full sentence was recorded in each synoptic gospels. All in all, it is more prudent to say that both variants are strong and viable, while still favoring the collective witness of all transmission lines together and the massive majority of the Greek manuscripts in favor of the Byzantine reading.

[9] NA-Text omits the definite article “ο”.

[10] NA-Text reads “εωρακαν”. Same verbal tense spelled differently.

----

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. P-Text: 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!