Differences in Acts

[rlvaughn]

What are the primary text differences in The Acts of the Apostles in older English translations such as Geneva Bible and King James Version, and newer English translations, such as New American Standard Bible and New International Version? Here are a couple of examples:

Acts 8:37

And Philip said unto him, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. Then he answered, and said, I believe that that Jesus Christ is that Son of God.

And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

[r]

[c]

Acts 9:5-7

And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against pricks. He then both trembling and astonied, said, Lord, what wilt thou that I do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou shalt do.

And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

And he said, “Who are You, Lord?” And He said, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told to you what you must do.”

“Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone.

What others? Thanks.

 

[rlvaughn]

BTW, not thinking about loads of verses that represent different decisions made by translators -- but rather places where a substantial portion of text is left out or added in either the TR or the NA.

 

[Logos1560]

Would any of these be possible textual differences between the 1560 Geneva Bible and the 1611 KJV in the book of Acts?


Acts 1:26

and he was by a common consent counted [1560 Geneva Bible]

and he was numbered [1611 KJV]


Acts 3:3

desired to receive an alms [1560 Geneva Bible]

asked an alms [1611 KJV]


Acts 7:16

Emor, son of Sychem [1560 Geneva Bible]

Emmor the father of Sychem [1611 KJV]


Acts 8:10

To whom they gave heed [1560 Geneva Bible]

To whom they all gave heed [1611 KJV]


Acts 8:13

the signs and great miracles [1560 Geneva Bible]

the miracles and signs [1611 KJV]


Acts 8:37

And Philip said unto him [1560 Geneva Bible]

And Philip said [1611 KJV]


Acts 14:23

And when they had ordained them elders by election [1560 Geneva Bible] [TR with possible influence from Latin NT of Erasmus or Latin NT of Beza or both]

And when they had ordained them elders [1611 KJV] [TR with possible textual influence from Latin Vulgate perhaps by means of 1582 Rheims]


Acts 21:1

And as we launched forth, and were departed from them [1560 Geneva Bible]

And it came to pass, that after we were gotten from them, and had launched [1611 KJV]

Acts 25:6
no more than ten days [1560 Geneva Bible]

more than ten days [1611 KJV] [see 1611 marginal note]


Acts 27:29

lest they should have fallen [1560 Geneva Bible]

lest we should have fallen [1611 KJV]

 

[rlvaughn]

Would any of these be possible textual differences between the 1560 Geneva Bible and the 1611 KJV in the book of Acts?

Interesting, thanks. That's not so much what interests me -- more like whole verses/sentences/phrase that are included or left out. Here are some I found (just listing the verses for now):

• Acts 7:37
• Acts 8:37
• Acts 9:5-7
• Acts 10:6, 21
• Acts 13:42
• Acts 15:34
• Acts 23:9b
• Acts 24:6–8
• Acts 28:29

 

[Logos1560]

Because of possible additions from the Latin Vulgate, a 1540 edition of the Great Bible has over one hundred words in one New Testament book (Acts) which are not found in the KJV (check and compare Acts 4:25, 4:27, 5:15, 13:30, 14:7, 15:34c, 15:41c, 18:4, 23:24c, 24:17).

 

[Logos1560]

Erasmus may have made some textual changes to his Byzantine Greek manuscripts in the book of Acts.

Jan Krans noted that “in John he [Erasmus] used min. 2 and in Acts min. 2815, which were corrected and marked-up as printer’s copy. Both manuscripts contain many errors, which affect not only spelling (itacisms etc.) but also missing words and phrases through homoeoteleuton etc.“ (Beyond What is Written, p. 62). Jan Krans asserted: “In the case of Acts Erasmus initially supposed that the Greek manuscripts he consulted suffered from omissions, while later, having consulted more sources, he came to doubt the Vulgate additions (Acts 8:37; 9:5-6; 10:6; 14:7; 23:25; 24:6-7)” (p. 61, footnote 36).

After including Acts 8:37 in his list of Latin Vulgate readings followed by Erasmus, Edward F. Hills maintained that “in his notes Erasmus says that he took this reading [Acts 8:37] from the margin of [manuscript] 4ap” (KJV Defended, pp. 200-201).

 

[Yeshua1]

Erasmus may have made some textual changes to his Byzantine Greek manuscripts in the book of Acts.

Jan Krans noted that “in John he [Erasmus] used min. 2 and in Acts min. 2815, which were corrected and marked-up as printer’s copy. Both manuscripts contain many errors, which affect not only spelling (itacisms etc.) but also missing words and phrases through homoeoteleuton etc.“ (Beyond What is Written, p. 62). Jan Krans asserted: “In the case of Acts Erasmus initially supposed that the Greek manuscripts he consulted suffered from omissions, while later, having consulted more sources, he came to doubt the Vulgate additions (Acts 8:37; 9:5-6; 10:6; 14:7; 23:25; 24:6-7)” (p. 61, footnote 36).

After including Acts 8:37 in his list of Latin Vulgate readings followed by Erasmus, Edward F. Hills maintained that “in his notes Erasmus says that he took this reading [Acts 8:37] from the margin of [manuscript] 4ap” (KJV Defended, pp. 200-201).

This makes it very hard to see why the TR would be the perfect Greek text, as per the KJVO!