Family 35 Greek Text of the New Testament.

[37818]

It is it's tenet that it is the original New Testament Text. That is it's intention.
Now what is called the Received Text is also supposed to be that Text as being handed down to us, so it is named. The Critical Text supposed to have textually recovered the original readings. Then we have a Majority Text.


https://www.prunch.com.br/wp-conten...ment-According-to-Family-35-Third-Edition.pdf

 

[Dr. Bob]

Amazing work; still unsure how it is that different from newest NAA that seeks to compile text + massive apparatus.

 

[37818]

Amazing work; still unsure how it is that different from newest NAA that seeks to compile text + massive apparatus.

NA but NAA?

Nestle-Aland :: academic-bible.com

A different philosophy in textual criticism.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Thanks. That's what I figured.

But it doesn't change the "choices" (whether those of NAA - I give credit to BOTH Alands - or 35) since all of the options are either in the text or the apparatus. For years I used a Stephanos text and its apparatus, but soon found it outdated as more and more texts/fragments were uncovered.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Kurt Aland has always said his wife Barbara, with whom he co-authored a number of books, did not get credit due and simply had the "one" last name often listed. When teaching NT research to pastoral and Greek students in college, I started using BOTH "Aland" references to remind them of honesty in citing sources AND recognizing some (like ME) had wives vastly smarter and greatly contributing to their ministry.

Am aware that NA is typically used. I continue with NAA by conscious decision, assuming some may not know of Barbara Aland and her body of work.

 

[37818]

https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tbsbibles...7C77/The-Doctrinal-Views-of-Dr-Kurt-Aland.pdf

 

[rsr]

To put Pickering's thesis simply, he believes that Family 35 (believed by others to be a recension compiled perhaps in the 12th or 13th century) and that the original text of the New Testament has been preserved in those manuscripts, not the Received Text or the Majority Text.

"I hold a copy of a perfect representative of the f 35 archetype for 22 of the 27 NT books, and my best copy is perfect for 17 of them. Quite apart from these, most of the scribes who copied f 35 exemplars did very careful work. The care with which f 35 exemplars were copied contrasts sharply with that afforded to exemplars of all other lines of transmission."

and

"I venture to affirm to the reader that all original wording of the NT is preserved in this edition, if not in the Text, at least in the apparatus."

It is true that Pickering's text closely resembles the MTs of Robinson-Pierpont and Hodges-Farstad (on which Pickering worked, IIRC). His text includes the Pericope Adulterae but excludes the Comma Johanneum, as do the MT compilations.

 

[Eliyahu]

To put Pickering's thesis simply, he believes that Family 35 (believed by others to be a recension compiled perhaps in the 12th or 13th century) and that the original text of the New Testament has been preserved in those manuscripts, not the Received Text or the Majority Text.

"I hold a copy of a perfect representative of the f 35 archetype for 22 of the 27 NT books, and my best copy is perfect for 17 of them. Quite apart from these, most of the scribes who copied f 35 exemplars did very careful work. The care with which f 35 exemplars were copied contrasts sharply with that afforded to exemplars of all other lines of transmission."

and

"I venture to affirm to the reader that all original wording of the NT is preserved in this edition, if not in the Text, at least in the apparatus."

It is true that Pickering's text closely resembles the MTs of Robinson-Pierpont and Hodges-Farstad (on which Pickering worked, IIRC). His text includes the Pericope Adulterae but excludes the Comma Johanneum, as do the MT compilations.

Correct.

What I checked are followings:

What are included in this
Mt 17:21, 18:11, 23:14
Mk 9:44, 46
Lk 6:1 Deutro-proto
Jn 8:1-11 Pericope Adulturae
Ephesians 3:9 dia Yeshu Kristo
1 Tim 3:16 theos ( not hos)

What are omitted :
Mk 15:28
Acts 8:37 - Because it contradicts Infant Baptism
Acts 18:21 dei me pantos thn eorthn.. Because it contradicts the claim that the Law was abolished at the Cross.
1 John 5:7 - Johanine COMMA. Only a few later dated copies support. Though Greek grammar doesn't work without the comma.

In general, this is a kind of compromising edition between WH-NA and TR
To me, this is another edition of Anti-TR

Eliyahu

 

[JesusFan]

Correct.

What I checked are followings:

What are included in this
Mt 17:21, 18:11, 23:14
Mk 9:44, 46
Lk 6:1 Deutro-proto
Jn 8:1-11 Pericope Adulturae
Ephesians 3:9 dia Yeshu Kristo
1 Tim 3:16 theos ( not hos)

What are omitted :
Mk 15:28
Acts 8:37 - Because it contradicts Infant Baptism
Acts 18:21 dei me pantos thn eorthn.. Because it contradicts the claim that the Law was abolished at the Cross.
1 John 5:7 - Johanine COMMA. Only a few later dated copies support. Though Greek grammar doesn't work without the comma.

In general, this is a kind of compromising edition between WH-NA and TR
To me, this is another edition of Anti-TR

Eliyahu

Still think that the best Greek tests to use are the Ct and the Mt!

 

[Conan]

Correct.

What I checked are followings:

What are included in this
Mt 17:21, 18:11, 23:14
Mk 9:44, 46
Lk 6:1 Deutro-proto
Jn 8:1-11 Pericope Adulturae
Ephesians 3:9 dia Yeshu Kristo
1 Tim 3:16 theos ( not hos)

What are omitted :
Mk 15:28
Acts 8:37 - Because it contradicts Infant Baptism
Acts 18:21 dei me pantos thn eorthn.. Because it contradicts the claim that the Law was abolished at the Cross.
1 John 5:7 - Johanine COMMA. Only a few later dated copies support. Though Greek grammar doesn't work without the comma.

In general, this is a kind of compromising edition between WH-NA and TR
To me, this is another edition of Anti-TR

Eliyahu

Can you tell us what Greek Grammer's are you judging the Apostle John's 1st century Greek? Do you have any Greek Grammers to quote from back then? 1st century AD? Any from BC? Anything ancient? How about the Greek Scribes that faithfully copied John the Apostles Greek Text? Did they have a problem with Johns Greek? Why didn't they fix it? Scribes always tried to fix a mistake just like we do today. Why didn't they try to fix John the Apostles Greek? They didn't know Greek as good as you? Again, what Greek grammers were around to judge the Apostles 1st century Greek?

 

[37818]

. . . what Greek grammers were around to judge the Apostles 1st century Greek?

This notion regarding first century New Testament grammar is problematic. What ever the grammar of the God breathed texts was, was inerrant. Or the notion of a God breathed text is mere fantasy.

 

[Conan]

This notion regarding first century New Testament grammar is problematic. What ever the grammar of the God breathed texts was, was inerrant. Or the notion of a God breathed text is mere fantasy.

You are correct, since a first century Greek grammer is a made up fantasy. The things that God said are God breathed and perfect, complete and totally true and trustworthy.

5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

8 And there are three that bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.

10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God

 

[Eliyahu]

Can you tell us what Greek Grammer's are you judging the Apostle John's 1st century Greek? Do you have any Greek Grammers to quote from back then? 1st century AD? Any from BC? Anything ancient? How about the Greek Scribes that faithfully copied John the Apostles Greek Text? Did they have a problem with Johns Greek? Why didn't they fix it? Scribes always tried to fix a mistake just like we do today. Why didn't they try to fix John the Apostles Greek? They didn't know Greek as good as you? Again, what Greek grammers were around to judge the Apostles 1st century Greek?

When we read the ancient Greek sentences of the manuscripts, some uncommon grammars are the order of the words in the sentences. They are not the problems at all as it relates to the emphasis.
What I am talking about the grammatical problem with 1 John 5:7-8, is the gender of the words.
Without the Johanine COMMA, the masculine pronouns are taking over the neutral nouns, which is absolutely nonsense.
Have you checked the Hutos and Hutoi in those verses? Do you think it was a scribal mistake?
On the other hand, the sentences including the COMMA are consistent with the genders of the words and the pronouns.
If you know the Greek grammar, you can find the sentences with the Comma are perfect with the gender while its omission causes the discrepancies between the words and the pronouns.

Textus Receptus
5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
5:8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἕν τῇ γῇ, τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἐν εἰσὶν


WH -NA
5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες
5:8 τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν

Why does oi treis( Masculine gender) take over the pneuma, the hudor, the haima ( all neuter gender)?
With the Comma, it is quite natural as they are all masculine genders.
Such inconsistency is too apparent discrepancy to be considered as a scribal error.
It is well known that there is a serious grammatical error without the Comma.


Eliyahu

 

[Conan]

When we read the ancient Greek sentences of the manuscripts, some uncommon grammars are the order of the words in the sentences. They are not the problems at all as it relates to the emphasis.
What I am talking about the grammatical problem with 1 John 5:7-8, is the gender of the words.
Without the Johanine COMMA, the masculine pronouns are taking over the neutral nouns, which is absolutely nonsense.
Have you checked the Hutos and Hutoi in those verses? Do you think it was a scribal mistake?
On the other hand, the sentences including the COMMA are consistent with the genders of the words and the pronouns.
If you know the Greek grammar, you can find the sentences with the Comma are perfect with the gender while its omission causes the discrepancies between the words and the pronouns.

Textus Receptus
5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες εν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν
5:8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἕν τῇ γῇ, τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἐν εἰσὶν


WH -NA
5:7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες
5:8 τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν

Why does oi treis( Masculine gender) take over the pneuma, the hudor, the haima ( all neuter gender)?
With the Comma, it is quite natural as they are all masculine genders.
Such inconsistency is too apparent discrepancy to be considered as a scribal error.
It is well known that there is a serious grammatical error without the Comma.


Eliyahu

Of course when someone added the Comma to the Greek in the early 1500's they made the genders agree. Why wouldn't they? It was invented in Latin. Didn't show up in Greek until 1214 AD when a Latin counsel was translated into Greek. Erasmus didn't have it in his first 2 Greek New Testaments, and he came underfire from 2 Latin leaders because it did not contain the Latin Comma. Erasmus responded he did not find it in his Greek manuscripts. Lo and behold one was produced, so he included it in his 3rd edition. 1400 years after the Greek New Testament was written!

 

[JesusFan]

Of course when someone added the Comma to the Greek in the early 1500's they made the genders agree. Why wouldn't they? It was invented in Latin. Didn't show up in Greek until 1214 AD when a Latin counsel was translated into Greek. Erasmus didn't have it in his first 2 Greek New Testaments, and he came underfire from 2 Latin leaders because it did not contain the Latin Comma. Erasmus responded he did not find it in his Greek manuscripts. Lo and behold one was produced, so he included it in his 3rd edition. 1400 years after the Greek New Testament was written!

The passage seems to have been carried over directly from a Latin interpolation, as there is still no Greek evidence to support that it was seen as being part of the original book of 1 John!

 

[Ziggy]

If there were a supposed "grammatical error" when the Comma is not present, then the *native* Greek-speaking scribes for well over a thousand years of copying manuscripts must have been among the most ignorant people on earth, since the Comma is missing in all but a handful of Greek manuscripts that show up only after the 14th century.

Similarly, one would have expected *all* Greek biblical grammarians from ancient times to the present to have raised this as a most serious issue--but they *aren't* doing so, demonstrating this whole thing to be basically a trumped-up KJV-only claim and nothing more.

The absurdity of this whole scenario demonstrates why the supposed KJVO "grammatical error" claim is bogus from the get-go.

 

[Bluefalcon]

Grammarians writing grammars is not a new thing. Antiquity had bunches of them. A few were Aristarchus of Samothrace, Dionysius Thrax, Apollodorus of Athens, Apollonius Dyscolus, Aelius Herodianus.

 

[JesusFan]

If there were a supposed "grammatical error" when the Comma is not present, then the *native* Greek-speaking scribes for well over a thousand years of copying manuscripts must have been among the most ignorant people on earth, since the Comma is missing in all but a handful of Greek manuscripts that show up only after the 14th century.

Similarly, one would have expected *all* Greek biblical grammarians from ancient times to the present to have raised this as a most serious issue--but they *aren't* doing so, demonstrating this whole thing to be basically a trumped-up KJV-only claim and nothing more.

The absurdity of this whole scenario demonstrates why the supposed KJVO "grammatical error" claim is bogus from the get-go.

As you stated, very strange that no Greek grammarian in the past raised anything on this issue, and that all references to it to be included was found in the Latin references alone!

 

[Eliyahu]

Of course when someone added the Comma to the Greek in the early 1500's they made the genders agree. Why wouldn't they? It was invented in Latin. Didn't show up in Greek until 1214 AD when a Latin counsel was translated into Greek. Erasmus didn't have it in his first 2 Greek New Testaments, and he came underfire from 2 Latin leaders because it did not contain the Latin Comma. Erasmus responded he did not find it in his Greek manuscripts. Lo and behold one was produced, so he included it in his 3rd edition. 1400 years after the Greek New Testament was written!

Please note the followings:

Tertullian, Adversus Praxean of RB 215
Against Praxeas ( Heresies) 215AD
And so the connection of the Father, and the Son, and of the Paraclete makes three cohering entities, one cohering from the other, which three are one entity" refers to the unity of their substance, not to the oneness of their number.

Priscillian, Liber Apologeticus 380 AD

As John says "and there are three which give testimony on earth, the water, the flesh the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three which give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Christ Jesus."

These scholars supported or proved the Comma was the part of the genuine Bible:

Cyprian - 250 AD, Athanasius 350 A.D., Priscillian -385 AD, Jerome 420 AD, Fulgentius (late 5th century), Cassiodorus, Isidore of Seville, Jaqub of Edessa, Thomas Aquinas, John Wycliffe, Desiderus Erasmus, Stephanus, Lopez de Zuniga, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, Cipriano de Valera, John Owen, Francis Turretin, John Wesley, John Gill, Matthew Henry.

John Gill said:
JOHN GILL commenting on 1 John 5:7 - "As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many Latin manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the Vulgate Latin edition of the London Polyglot Bible: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of Jerome, has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."
1 John 5:7 - Meaning and Commentary on Bible Verse

Among the 9200 Latin manuscripts dated before 1500AD the majority have the Comma.
Father, Word, Spirit instead of Father, Son, Spirit is a typical Johannine style.
As I said before, without the Comma, the sentences don't make sense due to the gender discrepancy.
Oi Treis should have been : Ta Treis because the previours words are all neutral gender.
In other words, the current WH-NA is wrong in grammar

The gnosism in the Western Roman Empirre region and the Sabelianism in the Eastern Roman Empire region caused
the elimination of the Comma.
Erasmus knew that the Comma was the part of the genuine Bible, but couldn't insert it without the supporting Greek manuscripts and promised that he would include it as soon as anyone could provide any manuscripts. Then someone brought the manuscripts supporting it. So, it was included. He didn't manufacture the manuscripts. He couldn't have all the manuscripts necessary for the right compilation, which is quite understandable.

Even if the heretics deleted the Comma dilligently from the manuscripts, many scholars quoted the Comma in their books.
God knows the full history and I believe the Comma is the genuine part of the Bible.


Eliyahu

 

[37818]

Please note the followings:

Tertullian, Adversus Praxean of RB 215
Against Praxeas ( Heresies) 215AD
And so the connection of the Father, and the Son, and of the Paraclete makes three cohering entities, one cohering from the other, which three are one entity" refers to the unity of their substance, not to the oneness of their number.

Priscillian, Liber Apologeticus 380 AD

As John says "and there are three which give testimony on earth, the water, the flesh the blood, and these three are in one, and there are three which give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one in Christ Jesus."

These scholars supported or proved the Comma was the part of the genuine Bible:

Cyprian - 250 AD, Athanasius 350 A.D., Priscillian -385 AD, Jerome 420 AD, Fulgentius (late 5th century), Cassiodorus, Isidore of Seville, Jaqub of Edessa, Thomas Aquinas, John Wycliffe, Desiderus Erasmus, Stephanus, Lopez de Zuniga, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, Cipriano de Valera, John Owen, Francis Turretin, John Wesley, John Gill, Matthew Henry.

John Gill said:
JOHN GILL commenting on 1 John 5:7 - "As to the old Latin interpreter, it is certain it is to be seen in many Latin manuscripts of an early date, and stands in the Vulgate Latin edition of the London Polyglot Bible: and the Latin translation, which bears the name of Jerome, has it, and who, in an epistle of his to Eustochium, prefixed to his translation of these canonical epistles, complains of the omission of it by unfaithful interpreters."
1 John 5:7 - Meaning and Commentary on Bible Verse

Among the 9200 Latin manuscripts dated before 1500AD the majority have the Comma.
Father, Word, Spirit instead of Father, Son, Spirit is a typical Johannine style.
As I said before, without the Comma, the sentences don't make sense due to the gender discrepancy.
Oi Treis should have been : Ta Treis because the previours words are all neutral gender.
In other words, the current WH-NA is wrong in grammar

The gnosism in the Western Roman Empirre region and the Sabelianism in the Eastern Roman Empire region caused
the elimination of the Comma.
Erasmus knew that the Comma was the part of the genuine Bible, but couldn't insert it without the supporting Greek manuscripts and promised that he would include it as soon as anyone could provide any manuscripts. Then someone brought the manuscripts supporting it. So, it was included. He didn't manufacture the manuscripts. He couldn't have all the manuscripts necessary for the right compilation, which is quite understandable.

Even if the heretics deleted the Comma dilligently from the manuscripts, many scholars quoted the Comma in their books.
God knows the full history and I believe the Comma is the genuine part of the Bible.


Eliyahu

I understand you are persuaded by this information. There is absolutely no evidence that it has any origin in the Greek.

Pickering's translation note: "Those who use the AV or NKJV are used to: “There are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.” The words in italics are only found in five late Greek manuscripts (less than 1% of the total) and part of the Latin tradition, from which they came. To be more precise, the manuscripts are: (61)[16th], (629)[14th], (918)[16th], 2318 [18th], 2473 [17th], wherein the cursives in ( ) all differ from each other; the two that agree verbatim with TR were probably copied from it. The only one that is clearly early enough to have served as TR’s exemplar, 629, is far too different—it lacks the seven last words in TR, omits another five, changes five and adds two—19 out of 40 words is too much; the Textus Receptus is not based on cursive 629, so it must be a translation from the Latin (or its exemplar is lost). The shorter reading makes excellent sense. [Those who make ‘the three heavenly witnesses’ a litmus test for orthodoxy are either ignorant or perverse (or both).]"