Do you think "blessed are you among women" does, or doesn't, belong in Luke 1:28?
Luke 1:28 (HCSB)
And the angel came to her and said,
"Rejoice, favored woman!
The Lord is with you."[a: Other mss add
_blessed are you among women_]
As of A.D. 175, the complete text was present:
Diatesseron 1:29
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf09.iv.iii.i.html
And the angel entered unto her and said unto her,
Peace be unto thee,
thou who art filled with grace.
Our Lord is with thee,
thou blessed amongst women.
The original Aramaic of the Peshitta has the complete text:
Luke 1:28 (based on Younan's interlinear at peshitta.org)
And the malaka [angelic messenger] came to her and said to her,
"Shlam [hello/ peace] to you full of grace.
Maran [our Lord] is with you,
blessed among women."
Textual Note: Luke 1:28
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/06/textua...e-128.html
Translations based on traditional text (emphasis added):
Tyndale (1536) Luke 1:28: And the angel went in unto her, and said: Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee: *blessed art thou among women.*
KJV Luke 1:28: And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: *blessed _art_ thou among women.*
Translations based on modern-critical text:
RSV Luke 1:28: And he came to her and said, “Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you!”
ESV Luke 1:28: And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!”
External Evidence:
The traditional reading is supported by A (Alexandrinus), C, D, Theta, family 13, 33, and the vast majority of manuscripts. It is also the reading of the Syriac, and it appears in the Church Father Eusebius. Metzger begrudgingly admits that the traditional reading is supported by “fairly good witnesses” (Textual Commentary, p. 129).
The modern critical reading is supported by the “big two” of modern text criticism: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. It is also supported by L, W, Psi, and family 1, as well as by the Church Father Epiphanius of Constantia.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 2:14 was originally written, do you think it had:
"peace on earth to people He favors"?
"peace on earth, good will to people"?
Luke 2:14 (HCSB)
Glory to God in the highest heaven,
and peace on earth
to people He favors![a: Other mss read _earth
good will to people_]
As of A.D. 175, the latter reading was present:
Diatesseron 2:22
Praise be to God in the highest,
And on the earth peace,
and good hope to men.
The original Aramaic of the Peshitta has the latter reading:
Luke 2:14 (Younan)
"Tishbokhtha [glory/ praise] to Allaha in the highest,
and on earth shlama [peace]
and good hope to the sons of men."
Text Note: Luke 2:14
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/07/text-n...e-214.html
The Issue:
The textual issue in this well-known “Christmas” passage is reflected in the renderings of various English translations. Whereas translations based on the traditional text read: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, *goodwill toward men”* (AV, emphasis added), those based on modern texts read, “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace *to those on whom his favor rests”* (NIV, emphasis added).
In Greek, the issue is the matter of the case of a single word, eudokia. Should it be a nominative eudokia: “goodwill toward men” [en anthropais eudokia] or genitive eudokias: “among men of goodwill” [en anthropais eudokias]?
Is the angelic announcement threefold (glory, peace, and goodwill) or twofold (glory and peace) with the expanded emphasis on his peace bestowed among those “on whom his favor rests” (NIV) or “among men with whom He is pleased” (NASB)?
External evidence:
The traditional reading of eudokia is supported by L, Theta, Psi, family 1, family 13, and the vast majority of manuscripts. It is also supported by the Syriac and Bohairic versions, as well as by the Church Fathers Eusebius and Epiphanius of Constantia.
The modern critical reading of eudokias is supported by the original hands of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, as well as codices A, D, W, and a few Latin manuscripts. Among the Church Fathers it is found in some texts from Origen and in Cyril of Jerusalem.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 2:33 was originally written, do you think it had: father? Joseph?
Luke 2:33 (HCSB)
His father and mother[a: Other mss read _But Joseph and His mother_] were amazed at what was being said about Him.
The "Joseph and His mother" phrasing was had as of A.D. 175:
Diatesseron 2:41-42
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf09.iv.iii.ii.html
And Joseph and his mother were marvelling at the things which were being said concerning him.
The "Joseph and His mother" phrasing is present in the original Aramaic:
Luke 2:33 (Younan of peshitta.org)
And Yosip and his mother were marveling at these things that were spoken concerning him.
Text Note: Luke 2:33 (43)
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/07/text-n...33-43.html
The Issue:
The textual question in Luke 2:33 is whether the verse should read “his father and mother [ho pater autou kai he meter]” (modern critical text) or “Joseph and his mother [Ioseph kai he meter autou]” (traditional text). The primary issue, then, is whether or not the text makes use of the noun “father [pater]” or the personal noun “Joseph [Ioseph].”
This distinction is reflected in modern English translations:
Translations based on the traditional text (emphasis added):
KJV: And *Joseph* and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
NKJV: And *Joseph* and His mother marveled at those things which were spoken of Him.
Translations based on the modern-critical text (emphasis added)
NIV: The *child's father* and mother marveled at what was said about him.
ESV: And *his father* and his mother marveled at what was said about him.
External Evidence:
The traditional text is supported by codices A, Theta, Psi, family 13, 33, and the vast majority of Greek manuscripts. It is also supported by several ancient versions such as the Old Latin and the Gothic. Metzger also notes that this is the reading of Tatian’s Diatesseron (c. 2nd century) (Textual Commentary, p. 134).
The modern critical text is supported by Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, in addition to a few other codices. It is also supported by several ancient versions, including a few Vulgate manuscripts.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 4:4 was originally written, do you think it had, or lacked, "but by every word of God"?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...HCSB;NABRE
Luke 4:4 (KJV) And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That
man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word of God.
Luke 4:4 (HCSB) But Jesus answered him, “It is written:
Man must not live on bread alone.”[a: Other mss add
_but on every word of God_]
Luke 4:4 didn't make it into Tatian's Diatesseron.
Luke 4:4 (based on Younan)
Yeshua answered and said to him,
"It is written that,
it is not by bread alone man should live,
rather, by every word of Allaha."
Text Note: Luke 4:4 (fixed a typo)
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/11/text-n...ke-44.html
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/4-4.htm
The issue:
The question is with the citation of Deuteronomy 8:3. In the modern critical text, the verse ends, “for it is written that man does not live by bread alone.” The traditional text, however, adds, after this statement, “but by every word of God [all' epi panti rhemati theou].”
External evidence:
The traditional text has wide and ancient support, including codices Alexandrinus, Theta, Psi, family 1, family 13, and the vast majority of manuscripts.
The modern critical reading is supported by the heavyweight codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and three others.
Luke 1:28 (HCSB)
And the angel came to her and said,
"Rejoice, favored woman!
The Lord is with you."[a: Other mss add
_blessed are you among women_]
As of A.D. 175, the complete text was present:
Diatesseron 1:29
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf09.iv.iii.i.html
And the angel entered unto her and said unto her,
Peace be unto thee,
thou who art filled with grace.
Our Lord is with thee,
thou blessed amongst women.
The original Aramaic of the Peshitta has the complete text:
Luke 1:28 (based on Younan's interlinear at peshitta.org)
And the malaka [angelic messenger] came to her and said to her,
"Shlam [hello/ peace] to you full of grace.
Maran [our Lord] is with you,
blessed among women."
Textual Note: Luke 1:28
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/06/textua...e-128.html
Translations based on traditional text (emphasis added):
Tyndale (1536) Luke 1:28: And the angel went in unto her, and said: Hail full of grace, the Lord is with thee: *blessed art thou among women.*
KJV Luke 1:28: And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: *blessed _art_ thou among women.*
Translations based on modern-critical text:
RSV Luke 1:28: And he came to her and said, “Hail, O favored one, the Lord is with you!”
ESV Luke 1:28: And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!”
External Evidence:
The traditional reading is supported by A (Alexandrinus), C, D, Theta, family 13, 33, and the vast majority of manuscripts. It is also the reading of the Syriac, and it appears in the Church Father Eusebius. Metzger begrudgingly admits that the traditional reading is supported by “fairly good witnesses” (Textual Commentary, p. 129).
The modern critical reading is supported by the “big two” of modern text criticism: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. It is also supported by L, W, Psi, and family 1, as well as by the Church Father Epiphanius of Constantia.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 2:14 was originally written, do you think it had:
"peace on earth to people He favors"?
"peace on earth, good will to people"?
Luke 2:14 (HCSB)
Glory to God in the highest heaven,
and peace on earth
to people He favors![a: Other mss read _earth
good will to people_]
As of A.D. 175, the latter reading was present:
Diatesseron 2:22
Praise be to God in the highest,
And on the earth peace,
and good hope to men.
The original Aramaic of the Peshitta has the latter reading:
Luke 2:14 (Younan)
"Tishbokhtha [glory/ praise] to Allaha in the highest,
and on earth shlama [peace]
and good hope to the sons of men."
Text Note: Luke 2:14
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/07/text-n...e-214.html
The Issue:
The textual issue in this well-known “Christmas” passage is reflected in the renderings of various English translations. Whereas translations based on the traditional text read: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, *goodwill toward men”* (AV, emphasis added), those based on modern texts read, “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace *to those on whom his favor rests”* (NIV, emphasis added).
In Greek, the issue is the matter of the case of a single word, eudokia. Should it be a nominative eudokia: “goodwill toward men” [en anthropais eudokia] or genitive eudokias: “among men of goodwill” [en anthropais eudokias]?
Is the angelic announcement threefold (glory, peace, and goodwill) or twofold (glory and peace) with the expanded emphasis on his peace bestowed among those “on whom his favor rests” (NIV) or “among men with whom He is pleased” (NASB)?
External evidence:
The traditional reading of eudokia is supported by L, Theta, Psi, family 1, family 13, and the vast majority of manuscripts. It is also supported by the Syriac and Bohairic versions, as well as by the Church Fathers Eusebius and Epiphanius of Constantia.
The modern critical reading of eudokias is supported by the original hands of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, as well as codices A, D, W, and a few Latin manuscripts. Among the Church Fathers it is found in some texts from Origen and in Cyril of Jerusalem.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 2:33 was originally written, do you think it had: father? Joseph?
Luke 2:33 (HCSB)
His father and mother[a: Other mss read _But Joseph and His mother_] were amazed at what was being said about Him.
The "Joseph and His mother" phrasing was had as of A.D. 175:
Diatesseron 2:41-42
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf09.iv.iii.ii.html
And Joseph and his mother were marvelling at the things which were being said concerning him.
The "Joseph and His mother" phrasing is present in the original Aramaic:
Luke 2:33 (Younan of peshitta.org)
And Yosip and his mother were marveling at these things that were spoken concerning him.
Text Note: Luke 2:33 (43)
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/07/text-n...33-43.html
The Issue:
The textual question in Luke 2:33 is whether the verse should read “his father and mother [ho pater autou kai he meter]” (modern critical text) or “Joseph and his mother [Ioseph kai he meter autou]” (traditional text). The primary issue, then, is whether or not the text makes use of the noun “father [pater]” or the personal noun “Joseph [Ioseph].”
This distinction is reflected in modern English translations:
Translations based on the traditional text (emphasis added):
KJV: And *Joseph* and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
NKJV: And *Joseph* and His mother marveled at those things which were spoken of Him.
Translations based on the modern-critical text (emphasis added)
NIV: The *child's father* and mother marveled at what was said about him.
ESV: And *his father* and his mother marveled at what was said about him.
External Evidence:
The traditional text is supported by codices A, Theta, Psi, family 13, 33, and the vast majority of Greek manuscripts. It is also supported by several ancient versions such as the Old Latin and the Gothic. Metzger also notes that this is the reading of Tatian’s Diatesseron (c. 2nd century) (Textual Commentary, p. 134).
The modern critical text is supported by Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, in addition to a few other codices. It is also supported by several ancient versions, including a few Vulgate manuscripts.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 4:4 was originally written, do you think it had, or lacked, "but by every word of God"?
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...HCSB;NABRE
Luke 4:4 (KJV) And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That
man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word of God.
Luke 4:4 (HCSB) But Jesus answered him, “It is written:
Man must not live on bread alone.”[a: Other mss add
_but on every word of God_]
Luke 4:4 didn't make it into Tatian's Diatesseron.
Luke 4:4 (based on Younan)
Yeshua answered and said to him,
"It is written that,
it is not by bread alone man should live,
rather, by every word of Allaha."
Text Note: Luke 4:4 (fixed a typo)
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2012/11/text-n...ke-44.html
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/4-4.htm
The issue:
The question is with the citation of Deuteronomy 8:3. In the modern critical text, the verse ends, “for it is written that man does not live by bread alone.” The traditional text, however, adds, after this statement, “but by every word of God [all' epi panti rhemati theou].”
External evidence:
The traditional text has wide and ancient support, including codices Alexandrinus, Theta, Psi, family 1, family 13, and the vast majority of manuscripts.
The modern critical reading is supported by the heavyweight codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus and three others.