Tag: Textual Criticism

Why Has Acts 24:6-8 Been Removed From the Modern Bibles?

P74 א A B H L P 049 cop lack the following from vss 6-8, which read, according to (E) Ψ Maj 33 614 1739 it (syr): “We wanted to judge him according to our own Law. 7 But Lysias the commander came along, and with much violence took him out of our hands, 8 ordering his accusers to come before you.” The earliest and most reliable manuscripts have the shorter reading. The interpolation is a classic example of a scribe trying to fill in what he perceives to be gaps in the text.

0

Why Did They Remove Acts 15:34 from the Bible?

Verse 34 is not contained in the earliest and diverse manuscripts (P74 א A B E Ψ Maj syrp copbo), while vs. 34 is contained in two different forms in other manuscripts (C 33 614 1739 syr** copsa) “But it seemed good to Silas to remain there” and (P127vid D it,w) “But it seemed good to Silas to remain with them, so Judas traveled alone.”

0

The Earliest and Most Trustworthy Greek New Testament Manuscripts Do Not Include Acts 8:37

If the verse was an original part of Luke’s text, there is no good reason for explaining why it would have been omitted in so many ancient manuscripts and versions. Rather, this verse is a classic example of scribal gap-filling, in that it supplied the apparent gap left by the unanswered question of the previous verse (“The eunuch said, ‘Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?’ ”).

0

Why Have Modern Bibles Removed John 5:3b–4?

Some translations add verses and phrases that are not in the oldest and most reliable available Bible manuscripts. Many modern translations either omit those later additions or acknowledge that those additions lack support from the most authoritative sources. Many of these were added hundreds of years after the Bible author wrote his book.

1

Why Is Mark 11:26 Missing From Our Modern Bible Translations?

Mark 11:26 Many later Greek manuscripts added vs. 26, as the scribes expanded on verse 25, inserting the words from Matt. 6:15 making it agree with its parallel account. [But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father who is in the heavens forgive your trespasses.] However, the omission has much stronger manuscript support:  א B L W Δ Ψ 565 700 syrs WH NU lack vs 26.

1

How Is It That Mark 9:44 & 9:46 Were Not In the Original Gospel of Mark?

Copyists made some additions to their Greek text at times. They were more inclined to do this than to omit material. One must always carry out careful research of the external and internal evidence to uncover such scribal interpolations. Hence, the most dependable witnesses are from the Alexandrian family of manuscripts found to be the most condensed. On the other hand, the Byzantine family is the most drawn out and extended from scribes taking liberties with the text.

1

Why Has Mark 7:16 Been Excluded From Modern Bible Translations?

The WH NU reading has the earliest support among the manuscripts. The extra verse was added by scribes, borrowing it directly from 4:23 (see also 4:9) to provide an ending to an otherwise very short pericope, 7:14–15. This addition was included in TR and made popular by KJV, NKJV, NASB, NJB, and HCSB also include this extra verse.

1

List of New Testament Verses Not Included In Modern English Translations

These New Testament verses not included in modern English translations are verses of the New Testament that exist in older English translations (primarily the King James Version) but do not appear or have been relegated to footnotes in later versions, such as the Updated American Standard Version (UASV). Scholars have generally regarded these verses as later additions to the original text.

1

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑