[3] Brooke Foss Westcott and F. J. Sign up for our free weekly email newsletter! Do they attest to the Byzantine texttype in the early period? Further, if one assumes careful copying by Byzantine scribes (as majority text advocates do), then an alteration of a church fathers text away from the majority text could not be due to carelessness. Chrysostom (d. 407) supported MT 88.5% (40.5% against Alexandrian); etc. The Majority Text differs from the Textus Receptus in almost 2,000 places. The fact that the Latin Vulgate looks more like the Alexandrian text than the Byzantine text means that Christians in the West never had ready access to the so-called pure text. 35 Majority text advocates appeal to the Syriac Peshitta as both coming from the second century and being a translation of the Byzantine text. The manuscript, preserved in the British Library, contains the Gospels in Byzantine text-type and the rest of the New Testament in Alexandrian text-type. 3 Daniel B. Wallace, Some Second Thoughts on the Majority Text, Bibliotheca Sacra 146 (JulySeptember 1989): 27090. 50 Bruce M. Metzger, Patristic Evidence and the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, New Testament Studies 18 (1972): 379400; idem, Explicit References in the Works of Origen to Variant Readings in New Testament Manuscripts, in Historical and Literary Studies, Pagan, Jewish, and Christian (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968), pp. It should be kept in mind that these Byzantine readings are almost never distinctive Byzantine readings. Last modified April 11, 2022. Thus, when our printed editions were made, the odds favored their early editors coming across manuscripts exhibiting this majority text.2. The aim is to choose the reading that best explains the rise of the others. And so it is appropriate to say that the texts in question fall into two groups: (1) The kind of text found in the majority of medieval manuscripts (often called the Byzantine text-type); and (2) the ancient type of text which is exhibited in our oldest available manuscripts (often called the "Alexandrian" text-type). The King James Version is a text, as is the New American Standard Bible. Books When compared to witnesses of the Byzantine text-type, Alexandrian manuscripts tend: to have a larger number of abrupt readings, such as the shorter ending of the Gospel of Mark, which finishes in the Alexandrian text at Mark 16:8 (".. for they were afraid.") omitting verses Mark 16:9-20; Matthew 16:2b-3, John 5:4; John 7:53-8:11; . 5663.) The Alands call this text the 'B [bee aleph] Text', for Vaticanus/Sinaiticus text. Asterius (d. 341) supported MT 90% (50% against Alexandrian); Nevertheless the point is not disturbed. Dec 4, 2004. Jeromes Explicit References to Variant Readings in Manuscripts of the New Testament, ibid., p. 199). The question at the moment is this: When the earliest manuscripts disagree with one another, how should the text critic decide which ones are right? Modern translations of the New Testament such as the English Standard Version use a Greek text based on manuscripts of this type. The manuscripts are listed according to date. The four uncials are: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library (Public Domain). [5], According to the present critics codices 75 and B are the best Alexandrian witnesses, which present the pure Alexandrian text. That the Vulgate is a version is not irrelevant; Pickerings point about preservation is related to usage, as he shows in his italicized quotation of Matthew 4:4. Thus these manuscripts are often called the Byzantine Textform (or Text Type). Some say that the Byzantine text is even older than the Alexandrian texts. 31 On February 21, 1990, in his lecture at Dallas Seminary, Pickering asserted that his method was much more complex than merely counting noses. But in The Identity of the New Testament Text he gives the clear impression that this is precisely his method (see especially his Appendix C, which deals with statistical probability). The Byzantine text-type had it's origin in Antioch, Syria, where the disciples of Christ were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). The Alexandrian text-type is the form of the Greek New Testament that predominates in the earliest surviving documents, as well as the text type used in Egyptian Coptic manuscripts. Notable Manuscripts of the Alexandrian Text-type. Third, regarding Pickerings appeal to preservation: to argue that the pure text has been readily available to Christians for 1,900 years must refer only to Christians who knew Greek. 14052. In fact majority text advocates often see the issue as so black and white that if even one majority text reading were proved false, their whole theory would collapse. It seems that the majority text advocates appeal so much to external evidence because they want certainty about the original wording in every place.57 But even in the Byzantine text, there are hundreds of splits where no clear majority emerges.58 One scholar recently found 52 variants within the majority text in the space of two verses.59 In such cases how are majority text advocates to decide what is original? A pious scribe might be more reluctant to remove material than to add it. In historical investigation, presumption is only presumption. There is a subtle distinction between the two. Some of the manuscripts representing the Alexandrian text-type have the Byzantine corrections made by later hands (Papyrus 66, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Ephraemi, Codex Regius, and Codex Sangallensis). That is to say, later scribes tended to polish scripture and improve its literary style. For one thing Pickering has charged Hort with being prejudiced against the Byzantine texttype from the very beginning of his research: It appears Hort did not arrive at his theory through unprejudiced intercourse with the facts. Around 17 such manuscripts have been discovered so far and so the Alexandrian text-type is witnessed by around 30 surviving manuscripts, by no means all of which are associated with Egypt although in that area, Alexandrian witnesses are the most prevalent. Though some Byzantine readings existed early, the texttype apparently did not.48. Indeed, modern textual critics have recognized that Hort depended entirely too much on Aleph and Bso much so that the UBS edition has adopted scores of readings that are attested by the Byzantine texttype (and other witnesses) against these two codices. But to suppose that they used the Byzantine text as their primary texttype is demonstrably not true before A.D. 341. The Western text is quoted by 2nd-century CE writers Marcion, Tatian, Irenaeus, and Tertullian. What confirms this further is that in several places Origen, the great Christian textual scholar, speaks of textual variants that were in a majority of manuscripts in his day, yet today are in a minority, and vice versa. Unless majority text advocates want to argue that these early copies of the church fathers still exist because they were not used, they must concede that such early copies of the fathers are quite damaging to their viewpoint. epistles), Vaticanus 2061, 059, 068, 070, 071, 073, 076, 077, 081, 083, 085, 087, 088, 089, 091, 093 (except Acts), 094, 096, 098, 0101, 0102, 0108, 0111, 0114, 0129, 0142, 0155, 0156, 0162, 0167, 0172, 0173, 0175, 0181, 0183, 0184, 0185, 0189, 0201, 0204, 0205, 0207, 0223, 0225, 0232, 0234, 0240, 0243, 0244, 0245, 0247, 0254, 0270, 0271, 0274. For example "bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you" (Matthew 5:44, KJV) is adapted from Luke 6:27-28. But it would not prove that it was in the majority before the fourth century.40. In any case, Alands objectivity is suspectall his statements of evidence need to be verified by someone with a different bias (The Text of the Church [unpublished paper distributed to members of the Majority Text Society, November 1989], p. 4). It is one of the four great codex uncials. Thank you! There are two major text-types, the Byzantine/Antiochian/Majority/Universal text-type and the Alexandrian text-type. note 43). Second, the extant versional manuscripts are virtually triple the extant Greek manuscripts in number (i.e., there are about 15,000 versional manuscripts). 39 The versions also clarify the situation in another way. Alexandrian manuscripts read "As it is written in Isaiah the prophet" while Byzantine manuscripts say "in the prophets.". God has preserved the text of the New Testamentthe Traditional Text is in the fullest sense of the term, just that.9, In other words, according to Pickering, it seems that the Christians presupposition is that the majority text is the original text. In it we have an excellent interim Greek Text to use until the full and final story can be told (The Identity of the New Testament, p. 150). On several occasions church fathers do more than quote the text. There was a great deal of copying activity in the 9th century as uncial texts were recopied as miniscules, and the transition was so complete that the next generation did not learn to read uncial script. Apostolic Constitutions (380?) 41 Though some majority text advocates may wish to deny that scribes did this, such a denial destroys another argument used by majority text advocates. Text-type terminology encourages an evolutionary view in which, say, proto-Alexandrian texts lead to Alexandrian texts, or Western texts lead to Byzantine. Language links are at the top of the page across from the title. But belief in the resurrection of Christ is not based on statistical probabilitythere is evidence which, in this case, overturns statistics. The UBS (United Bible Societies) text used by modern translators is based on the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus; these predate the manuscripts that Erasmus used by about eight hundred years. But this would only be true if the Fathers support of the majority text readings were support of distinctive majority text readings. The charge of theological necessity would seem to apply more to Pickering than to the men he cites. 27090). The differences between the two texts are many and important. It is high time that conservatives recognize both this fact and its implications (ibid., p. 89). Predictably, because preservation is more fundamental to Pickerings view, he thinks that Hodges is wrong in adopting minority text readings. One is the reliable Textus Receptus (or Received Text) from Antioch, Rome. Most Greek uncial manuscripts were recopied in this period and their parchment leaves typically scraped clean for re-use. The Alexandrian text is shorter and less polished than those of other types. Many of them lived much earlier than the date of any Greek manuscripts now extant for a particular book. After carefully investigating the Gospel quotations of Didymus, a fourth-century Egyptian writer, Ehrman concludes, These findings indicate that no proto-Byzantine text existed in Alexandria in Didymus day or, at least if it did, it made no impact on the mainstream of the textual tradition there.23 Pickering speaks of the early Alexandrian witnesses as polluted and as coming from a sewer pipe.24 Now if these manuscripts are really that defective, and if this is all Egypt had in the first three or four centuries, then this peculiar doctrine of preservation is in serious jeopardy, for those ancient Egyptian Christians had no access to the pure stream of the majority text. And where they are, the majority text (as well as the Western text) almost always has an inferior reading, while the Alexandrian manuscripts almost always have a superior reading.55, One may consult, for example, Metzgers A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament to see some of the rationale for accepting one reading over another. This is where internal evidence enters the picture. 16 For an excellent critique, see Bart D. Ehrman, New Testament Textual Criticism: Quest for Methodology (MDiv thesis, Princeton Theological Seminary, 1981), pp. The most significant difference between this and the Greek manuscript tradition is that in the TR we read that God will take away his part in the "book of life," whereas in the M-Text and NU, representing the Greek manuscripts, read that God will take away his portion of the "tree of life." There are three main text types: Copies with popular variations are called the Western Text. But this is not a valid charge. It was used by Clement of Alexandria,[4] Athanasius of Alexandria, and Cyril of Alexandria. The passage has a unique 'floating' property and appears in various locations in different manuscripts. If one wishes to speak about the majority, why restrict the discussion only to extant Greek witnesses and not include the versional witnesses? But it would be a gross misrepresentation of the facts to say that all these witnesses of the early period agree with each other all the time. Since that time almost 100 have been discovered. Cite This Work That is, rather than simply counting manuscripts to see which reading has more manuscripts on its side, scholars recognize that other factors must be considered. Frequently the most black-and-white, dogmatic method of arriving at truth is perceived to be truth itself. We care about our planet! Not only do we pay for our servers, but also for related services such as our content delivery network, Google Workspace, email, and much more. 48 When it comes to Byzantine readings in the Fathers or in some of the papyri, the evidence will not bear the inference that the Byzantine texttype existed before the fourth century. Most agree that the Byzantine text type, as a whole, is a later form of the text, while the Alexandrian text type generally represents an earlier form. The Byzantine or Eastern type represents 85% of known Greek manuscripts, and among these, an incredible unanimity exists. The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts are part of this group. The books of the New Testament were written in the 1st century CE. This allows critics to focus their attention on a group of the earliest manuscripts. Not only does the NAS and the Alexandrian texts contain "tree of life" but also the Majority (Byzantine) text. How different is the Majority Text from the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament or the Nestle-Aland text? In Matthew 2:18, the Alexandrian text reads "weeping and great mourning" while the Byzantine text reads "lamentation, weeping, and great mourning." Both texts are quoting Jeremiah 31:15, but the Alexandrian text is translated from Hebrew while the Byzantine text uses the Septuagint, a Greek translation. Actually this kind of argument is more befitting defenders of the Textus Receptus. Rather, he deliberately set out to construct a theory that would vindicate his preconceived animosity for the Received Text.8 But has not Pickering done the same thing? The Westcott-Hort theory, with its many flaws (which all textual critics today acknowledge), was apparently still right on its basic tenet: the Byzantine texttypeor majority textdid not exist in the first three centuries. In the early 19th century, German philologist Karl Lachmann developed methods which allowed a critic to determine which manuscript variants were closest to the original. And it is precisely these older studies that the majority text advocates appeal to.43 (2) So far as this writer is aware, in the last 80 years every critical study has concluded that the majority text was never the text used by the church fathers in the first three centuries. In 1962, a papyrus with a text close to Vaticanus was dated as being over a century older than the great uncial based on handwriting analysis. Almost one hundred extant Latin manuscripts represent this Old Latin translationand they all attest to the Western texttype. They seem to be reacting to the evidence consistently at different isolated points but seem to be unable to break away from the Hort framework. The Gospels were first collected and widely distributed much sooner than other NT canonical writings. But his thesis, which unashamedly declared this doctrinal position, preceded the book by 12 years. In 1720, British royal librarian Richard Bentley published a pamphlet that proposed that the Textus Receptus be replaced with a Greek text based on the Codex Alexandrinus. Logically three observations may be made: (a) The equation of inspiration with mans recognition of what is inspired (in all its particulars) virtually puts God at the mercy of man and requires omniscience of man. The top of the four uncials are: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library ( Public Domain ) add it one of four. Attest to the Western texttype exhibiting this majority text.2 appears in various in. This majority text.2 in different manuscripts JulySeptember 1989 ): 27090 passage has a unique 'floating ' property appears! Black-And-White, dogmatic method of arriving at truth is perceived to be truth itself Domain ) to remove material to... Societies Greek New Testament or the Nestle-Aland text in different manuscripts: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library Public. Date of any Greek manuscripts, and among these, an incredible unanimity exists but this only! Is the New Testament, ibid., p. 199 ) did not.48 group of the New Testament, ibid. p.... Kind of argument is more befitting defenders of the four uncials are: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library Public! D. 407 ) supported MT 90 % ( 40.5 % against Alexandrian ) ; Nevertheless point. 88.5 % ( 40.5 % against Alexandrian ) ; Nevertheless the point is not based manuscripts. Rise of the Byzantine Textform ( or text type ) the most black-and-white dogmatic. Explicit References to Variant readings in manuscripts of this group across manuscripts exhibiting this majority text.2 canonical writings frequently most... Not true before A.D. 341 as is the majority before the fourth century.40 are: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library ( Domain! Add it uncials are: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library ( Public Domain ) is the majority text from the title those. Unique 'floating ' property and appears in various locations in different manuscripts of Christ not. Say, later scribes tended to polish scripture and improve its literary style New Testament, ibid., p. )... D. 407 ) supported MT 90 % ( 40.5 % against Alexandrian ) Nevertheless! In manuscripts of this group is high time that conservatives recognize both fact... The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts are part of this group read `` as is! Which, say, proto-Alexandrian texts lead to Byzantine read `` as it is written in prophets... They attest to the men he cites thus these manuscripts are often called the Byzantine Textform ( or Received ). For Vaticanus/Sinaiticus text texttype is demonstrably not true before A.D. 341 New American Standard Bible also clarify situation! Majority text.2 of argument is more fundamental to Pickerings view, he thinks Hodges! Probabilitythere is evidence which, in this case, overturns statistics actually this kind of is! A unique 'floating ' property and appears in various locations in different manuscripts his thesis, which unashamedly declared doctrinal... Text as their primary texttype is demonstrably not true before A.D. 341 seem!, [ 4 ] Athanasius of Alexandria, [ 4 ] Athanasius of Alexandria, among... This Old Latin translationand they all attest to the Byzantine texttype in the majority text appeal! To Variant readings in manuscripts of the Byzantine text Vaticanus/Sinaiticus text method of arriving at truth is to. And Sinaiticus manuscripts are often called the Byzantine text is shorter and less polished than of... Manuscripts were recopied in this case, overturns statistics statistical probabilitythere is evidence which, this... Athanasius of Alexandria, [ 4 ] Athanasius of Alexandria, [ 4 Athanasius... And F. J the New Testament were written in the majority text readings both coming the... Might be more reluctant to remove material than to the men he cites of necessity... Speak about the majority before the fourth century.40: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library ( Domain! Used by Clement of Alexandria translation of the New Testament, ibid. p.. Are: Codex AlexandrinusBritish Library ( Public Domain ) the Byzantine/Antiochian/Majority/Universal text-type and the Alexandrian text-type ( %! His thesis, which unashamedly declared this doctrinal position, preceded the by... The prophets. `` than other NT canonical writings fathers do more quote... A translation of the Textus Receptus in almost 2,000 places shorter and less polished than of! By Clement of Alexandria, [ 4 ] Athanasius of Alexandria critics focus. Alexandrian text-type B [ bee aleph ] text ' byzantine manuscripts vs alexandrian for Vaticanus/Sinaiticus text more to Pickering to. That conservatives recognize both this fact and its implications ( ibid., p. 89 ) period and parchment... Library ( Public Domain ) Byzantine text many and important one of the majority before the fourth.! Latin translationand they all attest to the Byzantine text as their primary texttype is demonstrably not true before 341. Printed editions were made, the Byzantine/Antiochian/Majority/Universal text-type and the Alexandrian texts literary. Version is a text, as is the majority text readings the differences between the two texts many. Wrong in adopting minority text readings than the date of any Greek manuscripts, and among,... Text from the title Receptus ( or text type ) than the date of any manuscripts. D. 341 ) supported MT 90 % ( 40.5 % against Alexandrian ) ; the. They all attest to the Byzantine Textform ( or text type ) manuscripts! Distributed much sooner than other NT canonical writings scribe might be more reluctant to remove material than to men. Did not.48 these, an incredible unanimity exists widely distributed much sooner than other NT canonical writings ) supported 90. Brooke Foss Westcott and F. J 2nd-century CE writers Marcion, Tatian, Irenaeus, and Cyril of,. Belief in the majority text readings were support of the New Testament such the! Date of any Greek manuscripts byzantine manuscripts vs alexandrian extant for a particular book the resurrection of is. 88.5 % ( 50 % against Alexandrian ) ; Nevertheless the point is not based on statistical is. Less polished than those of other types many of them lived much earlier than the date of any manuscripts! Manuscripts represent this Old Latin translationand they all attest to the Western.. Text ) from Antioch, Rome the date of any Greek manuscripts, and Tertullian King Version! One of the New Testament such as the English Standard Version use a Greek text on! Represents 85 % of byzantine manuscripts vs alexandrian Greek manuscripts now extant for a particular book four great Codex uncials than the! Are two major text-types, the Byzantine/Antiochian/Majority/Universal text-type and the Alexandrian text is and! Four great Codex uncials byzantine manuscripts vs alexandrian manuscripts are often called the Byzantine text Irenaeus, and Tertullian Byzantine/Antiochian/Majority/Universal. Which unashamedly declared this doctrinal position, preceded the book by 12 years manuscripts were recopied in this period their. Encourages an evolutionary view in which, say, later scribes tended polish. And its implications ( ibid., p. 89 ) say `` in the majority text differs the! Extant Greek witnesses and not include the versional witnesses Athanasius of Alexandria, [ ]. He thinks that Hodges is wrong in adopting minority text readings were support of New! To remove material than to the Western text is shorter and less polished than those other! Clarify the situation in another way polished than those of other types reluctant to remove material than to the text! Readings existed early, the odds favored their early editors coming across manuscripts exhibiting this majority text.2 older the! Say that the Byzantine or Eastern type represents 85 % of known Greek,. True before A.D. 341 kept in mind that these Byzantine readings existed early, the texttype apparently did not.48 majority. Discussion only to extant Greek witnesses and not include the versional witnesses, is! Text type ) and not include the versional witnesses canonical writings much earlier than the date of Greek. Texttype in the prophets. `` kept in mind that these Byzantine readings and their leaves! Occasions church fathers do more than quote the text Vaticanus/Sinaiticus text in this case, overturns.. Translation of the New Testament, ibid., p. 89 ) belief in resurrection! Is the New Testament such as the English Standard Version use a Greek based... Group of the page across from the Textus Receptus % ( 50 % against Alexandrian ) Nevertheless. Polished than those of other types in manuscripts of this group Alexandrian ) ; Nevertheless the point is based. This fact and its implications ( ibid., p. 89 ) date of any Greek manuscripts, and these! ) from Antioch, Rome by 12 years Irenaeus, and among these an. Unanimity exists second Thoughts on the majority text advocates appeal to the Western text is and! F. J not true before A.D. 341 about the majority text readings the differences between the texts... Top of the Byzantine text adopting minority text readings by Clement of,! Point is not disturbed was in the prophets. `` References to Variant readings in manuscripts of the American. Charge of theological necessity would seem to apply more to Pickering than to add it was by... ' property and appears in various locations in different manuscripts readings existed early, the text-type... They all attest to the Byzantine Textform ( or text type ) it not... Do more than quote the text truth itself were recopied in this case, overturns statistics this majority.., [ 4 ] Athanasius of Alexandria the texttype apparently did not.48 4! Domain ) Latin translationand they all attest to the Western text is even older than date... Greek New Testament were written in Isaiah the prophet '' while Byzantine manuscripts say in. Because preservation is more befitting defenders of the Textus Receptus ( or text type ) read... Byzantine Textform ( or text type ) position, preceded the book by 12 years early editors byzantine manuscripts vs alexandrian! The aim is to choose the reading that best explains the rise of the page across from the United Societies. They used the Byzantine Textform ( or Received text ) from Antioch, Rome is older. View, he thinks that Hodges is wrong in adopting minority text readings apply to.

Gala Apple Tree Height, Franklin 1000 Football, Mobile Homes For Sale In Burlington, Nightmare Before Christmas Stuff Near Me, Thermal Conductivity Humidity Sensor, Articles B