← Table of contents
Introduction to the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament

Note 242 — Chapter III · THEORY AND PRAXIS OF THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.[129] (continued 2)

William Edie translation

Attention may be directed in passing to the interesting way in which the witnesses are distributed. Thus we have in verse 51, for the omission of καὶ ἀνεφερ. εἰς τ. οὐρ. א* D Syrsin a b d e ff l*, Aug. ½; verse 52, omit προσκυν· αὐτόν, D Syrsin a b d e ff l, Aug. 1/1; verse 53, αἰνοῦντες for εὐλογοῦντες D a b d e ff l r (Aug.); (Syrsin here has מברכין, not משבחין which represents αἰνοῦντες in Luke ii. 13, 20, xix. 37, and, therefore, must have read εὐλογοῦντες in this passage). Now I ask, is it right to accept the testimony of D and its associates in verse 52, only to reject it in verse 53? And what amount of weight is added to the testimony of D by the addition of that of א*? Schiller says in Tell: “The strong is mightiest alone: united e’en the weak are strong”—how far are both these notions true in textual criticism?

Explore with AITake your curiosity a little further.

Reading settings