Luke 20:27-40 - Revision of the Textus Receptus

The gospel according to Luke

Chapter 20

---

27. προσελθοντες δε τινες των σαδδουκαιων οι αντιλεγοντες[1] αναστασιν μη ειναι επηρωτησαν αυτον Then came to him some of the Sadducees, who deny that there is a resurrection. And they asked him,

28. λεγοντες διδασκαλε μωυσης εγραψεν ημιν εαν τινος αδελφος αποθανη εχων γυναικα και ουτος ατεκνος αποθανη[2] ινα λαβη ο αδελφος αυτου την γυναικα και εξαναστηση σπερμα τω αδελφω αυτου saying, “Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies having a wife, and he dies without children, his brother should take the wife and raise up offspring for his brother.

29. επτα ουν αδελφοι ησαν και ο πρωτος λαβων γυναικα απεθανεν ατεκνος There were therefore seven brothers. And the first took a wife and died without children.

30. και ελαβεν ο δευτερος την γυναικα και ουτος απεθανεν ατεκνος And the second took her as wife, and he died without children[3].

31. και ο τριτος ελαβεν αυτην ωσαυτως δε και οι επτα [4] ου κατελιπον τεκνα και απεθανον And the third took her, and likewise the seven also died and left no children.

32. υστερον [5] παντων απεθανεν και η γυνη Last of all[6] the woman also died.

33. εν τη ουν αναστασει τινος αυτων γινεται γυνη οι γαρ επτα εσχον αυτην γυναικα So in the resurrection whose wife will she[7] be? For the seven had her as a wife.”

34. και αποκριθεις ειπεν αυτοις ο ιησους οι υιοι του αιωνος τουτου γαμουσιν και εκγαμισκονται[8] And answering[9], Jesus said to them, “The children of this age marry and are given in marriage.

35. οι δε καταξιωθεντες του αιωνος εκεινου τυχειν και της αναστασεως της εκ νεκρων ουτε γαμουσιν ουτε γαμιζονται[10] But those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.

36. ουδε[11] γαρ αποθανειν ετι δυνανται ισαγγελοι γαρ εισιν και υιοι εισιν του[12] θεου της αναστασεως υιοι οντες For they cannot die any more, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

37. οτι δε εγειρονται οι νεκροι και μωυσης εμηνυσεν επι της βατου ως λεγει κυριον τον θεον αβρααμ και τον[13] θεον ισαακ και τον θεον ιακωβ But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calls the Lord ‘The God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.’

38. θεος δε ουκ εστιν νεκρων αλλα ζωντων παντες γαρ αυτω ζωσιν Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.”

39. αποκριθεντες δε τινες των γραμματεων ειπον[14] διδασκαλε καλως ειπας And answering, some of the scribes said, “Teacher, you have spoken well.”

40. ουκετι δε ετολμων επερωταν αυτον ουδεν And[15] after that they did not dare to ask him anything.

---

[1] NA-Text reads “[αντι]λεγοντες” and renders “who say” instead of “who deny” as a possible reading, which is found in the P-Text. This alternative reading is supported by codices א, B, C, D, L, N, Θ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹, minuscules 33, 205, 565, 579, 892, 1071, 1230, 1241, 1253, 1365, 2542, the old Latin codices it^d, it^e, it^r1, the Curetonian Syriac, the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Peshitta, the Sahidic Coptic, the Bohairic Coptic, the Gothic and the Slavic version. The TR is supported by codices A, E, G, H, K, P, W, Δ, Π, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules 157, 180, 597, 700, 1006, 1009, 1010, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1242, 1243, 1292, 1342, 1344, 1424, 1505, 1546, 1646, 2148, 2174, the Byzantine manuscripts, the old Latin codices it^a, it^aur, it^c, it^f, it^ff2, itⁱ, it^l, it^q, the Harklean Syriac, the Armenian, the Georgian version and Theophylact. The external support is evidently on the side of “who say” on the agreement of a diversity of good witnesses, but this reading is suspicious of being a conformation to the parallel passage in Matthew 22:23. This is not a safe correction to the text.

[2] NA-Text (replacing “αποθανη” by “η”) and Vg-St omit “αποθανη” and render “and he is childless” (Latin equivalent: “et hic sine filiis fuerit”), which is supported by codices א*, (א¹), B, L, Ψ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹, minuscules 33, (579), 892, 2542, the old Latin codices and the Coptic versions. The TR is supported by codices A, W, Θ, minuscules 565, 700, 1424, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, the Byzantine manuscripts, the old Latin codices it^c, it^f, itⁱ, the Harklean Syriac version and Theophylact. This word was likely removed in the Alexandrian text to avoid superfluity in the text, once the previous clause had already mentioned the proposition that the brother dies.

[3] NA-Text omits “took her as wife, and he died without children”. This omission is possibly due to parableptic error that removed verse 30 entirely (απεθανεν ατεκνος και ελαβεν ο δευτερος την γυναικα και ουτος απεθανεν ατεκνος, thus missing verse 30). Then, scribes noticing the error added “and the second” to complete the sense of the passage by not jumping from the first to the third brother.

[4] NA-Text, P-Text, WPF³⁵ and M-Text omit “και”, which is supported by codices א, A, B, (D) and the Byzantine manuscripts. The inclusion is supported by codex Θ and Theophylact. The first and fifth editions of Erasmus’ TR included the conjunction. Then Stephanus removed it from the text, with which Beza agreed. Scrivener then reverted to the reading found in Erasmus. The evidence is on Stephanus’ side. So, the conjunction has been removed, reverting the reading to the TR of 1550, which is aligned with the NA-Text and the M-Text.

[5] M-Text, WPF³⁵ and P-Text add “δε”. This addition is supported by codex A, W, Θ, Ψ, family of manuscripts ƒ¹³, minuscules (33), (892), part of the Byzantine manuscripts and the Harklean Syriac version. The Sahidic Coptic version is divided. The omission is supported by codices א*, B, D, (L), minuscules (1), 579, part of the Byzantine manuscripts, the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Curetonian Syriac, the Peshitta, the Bohairic Coptic version and Theophylact. The inclusion of the conjunction here is likely due to harmonization to the parallel passage in Matthew 22:27 that reads this verse verbatim with the conjunction. No change to the text here.

[6] NA-Text omits “of all” and renders “afterward”.

[7] NA-Text reads “the woman” on a weak support of part of the Alexandrian manuscripts. Codex Sinaiticus agrees with the Byzantine text and the Latin scriptures here.

[8] NA-Text reads “γαμιζονται”, which is likely a harmonization to the same form of this verb found in verse 35. They can be used interchangeably.

[9] NA-Text and Vg-St omit “answering”, which is supported by codices א, B, D, L, minuscules 579, 892, 1241, the old Latin codices, the (Curetonian Syriac), the (Peshitta) and the Coptic versions. The inclusion is supported by codices A, W, Θ, Ψ, both families of manuscripts ƒ¹ and ƒ¹³, minuscule (33), 565, 700, 1424, 2542, the Byzantine manuscripts, the old Latin codex it^q, the Syriac Sinaiticus, the Harklean Syriac version and Theophylact. Natural addition can explain the inclusion of this verb as well as simplification the omission. This is a viable variant, but there is not enough internal strength to the rivbal reading to justify a correction to the text here. Nevertheless this a viable variant.

[10] NA-Text and P-Text read “γαμιζονται”, which is supported by codices א, D, L, Q, R, Δ and Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, book 3, ch. 12). M-Text and WPF³⁵ read “εκγαμιζονται”, which is supported by codices A, Γ and Π. The TR is supported by Theophylact. The Alexandrian “γαμιζονται” has the best support on the agreement of early majuscules of different types and has preserved the harder reading. It has been adopted in the Greek text.

[11] NA-Text reads “ουδε”, which is supported by codices A, B, D, L, P and Θ. The TR is supported by codices א, W, Ψ, both families of manuscripts ƒ¹ and ƒ¹³, minuscule 33, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. The Byzantine form of this word is likely a conformation to the words found in the previous verse. The Greek text has been adjusted following the NA-Text.

[12] NA-Text omits the definite article “του”, which is supported by codices (א), A, B, L, minuscules 579, 892 and 2542. The inclusion is supported by codices (D), W, Ψ, Δ, Θ, both families of manuscripts ƒ¹ and ƒ¹³, minuscules 33, 565, 700, 1241, 1424, the Byzantine manuscripts and Theophylact. Both forms are well supported.

[13] NA-Text omits the definite article “τον” and again before the “God of Jacob”.

[14] NA-Text reads “ειπαν”. Same verbal tense, different spelling.

[15] NA-Text reads “For”.

----

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. M-Text^RP - Majority Text compiled by Maurice Robinson & William Pierpont;

6. M-Text^HF - Majority Text compiled by Zane Hodges & Arthur Farstad; 

7. Vg-St: Vulgate of Stuttgart;  

8. WPF³⁵: Wilbur Pickering-family 35;

9. P-Text: Patriarchal Text, also known as Patriarchal Greek New Testament, published by the ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.

10. 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!