Tag Archives: textual criticism

Majuscule Uncial Robinson-Pierpont GNT

Robinson-Pierpont 2017 Greek New Testament in Majuscule / Uncial script

I have created and uploaded an edition of the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 Greek New Testament, Byzantine Textform, in all-majuscule letters (some say uncial letters).  This document is available for download in both “.docx” format and in PDF.  The PDF is 1.7 MB, 567 pages.

This document was created by David Robert Palmer to be a public domain document, in both “.docx” format and in PDF.  The Robinson-Pierpont Greek text is also free to use without permission.  For this document, I give you permission to to copy, paste, and / or re-format as you wish.  Only except that these documents are “locked” against changes in order to preserve the original formatting, and I ask that you leave them locked.  This means that if you want to edit or re-format the Microsoft® Word 2007 “.docx” document of the RP majuscule text, you can do so, but you will have to first “save as” a copy to your hard drive under another file name; in which copy you can then make changes.  Proper display of the “.docx” document may require that you install the KoineGreek.ttf font from Alan Bunning; the documents contain a download link for that font on the cover page.  This font was chosen because it renders the Greek majuscule / uncial letter Sigma as C, which is what is found in the early Greek New Testament manuscripts.  Be advised that the KoineGreek.ttf font renders a regular lower case letter into a capital Greek letter automatically.  If you wish to use some other font, you can do that, but you will probably first have to convert the base letters to upper case.

Nomina Sacra are used for the nominative, accusative, genitive, dative and vocative of κυριος, and the nom., acc. gen., dat. of θεος, Ἰησους, χριστος, and πνευμα..  It is possible that when the find/replace operations for these NS were conducted, some other word was accidentally changed which happened to contain these words.  This happened with vocative κυριε for example, but I believe I found them all and corrected them.

Download links (free) for the two documents: The PDF of the 2017 RP uncial text.  The Microsoft® Word 2007 “.docx” file of the Robinson-Pierpont majuscule text.

Robinson-Pierpont Greek New Testament, Byzantine textform in Uncial / Majuscule script

Robinson-Pierpont GNT in Majuscule

 

Please share this post about the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 GNT in Uncial / Majuscule font.

Majuscule Epistle of Jude

The Epistle of Jude in Majuscule

I have just created and uploaded the Epistle of Jude in majuscule font, similar to what New Testament manuscripts looked like in the 3rd century.  The Greek New Testament text is the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 text.  Thanks to Alan Bunning for the KoineGreek majuscule font.

If you are particularly interested in the Epistle of Jude, see also my Swanson-style chart of the Epistle of Jude in 62 manuscripts and 12 GNT editions.

Epistle of Jude in majuscule

The Epistle of Jude in majuscule

Please share this post about the Epistle of Jude in majuscule.

Robinson-Pierpont 2017 GNT

The 2017 edition of the Robinson-Pierpont Greek New Testament

I have completed and uploaded a PDF of the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 edition of “The New Testament in the Original Greek, Byzantine Text Form.”  I compiled it from raw text CCAT files sent to me by its author, Maurice A. Robinson, PhD. The PDF is now 622 pages, 13 MB in size.

The 2017 edition has very few, and minor, text changes from the 2005 version, including one corrected error of reading (based on misinterpretation of Hoskier’s data) at Rev 2:17 (now omit φαγειν) and also a few places where a marginal reading has now become the main text and vice versa.  Mainly it has updates and corrections in capitalization, accentuation, and punctuation, plus some previously missing iota subscripts. One feature different from the 2005 edition is that now the variants with the NA27 Greek New Testament are shown distinctly from variants withing the Byzantine text stream.

This PDF is designed to default to open with the bookmarks panel, or links bar, showing on the left, so that you can click on the name of a book or heading and it takes you there like an Internet link. If you are using a combination of device and software app in which this is not true, there may be an option in the “view” menu by which you may choose to view these bookmarks or links under, for example, “navigation panels.”

This PDF was designed to enable you to copy and paste from it, and also to print it.  Download the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 GNT.  Also, you can search in it for a verse reference, e.g., Lk 4:7.

If rather than the edition with all the variants you want a minimal version, you can download an edition of the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 GNT without the variants and without the Appendix here.  This document is 403 pages rather than 639, and its size is 9 MB rather than 12 MB.  Also available, for textual criticism experimentation, is an all-majuscule / uncial edition.  That was the PDF link; you can also download a Microsoft Word “.docx” edition of the Robinson-Pierpont 2017 Greek New Testament in all majuscule.

Continuous-text MSS by century

You can also download editions of some of my Greek-English documents, but with the Robinson-Pierpont Greek text, and the English translation thereof.  You can download them right here as well.  Completed are: Gospel of John, Epistle of James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John , Jude and Revelation.

Please share this post about the 2017 edition of the Robinson-Pierpont GNT.

Greek Definite Article

Acts 8:5

Here is a Greek textual variant that should demonstrate to beginners in NT Greek that maybe they don’t know how to interpret the definite article.

The Textus Receptus and the Robinson-Pierpont Greek texts both read εις πολιν της Σαμαρειας, without the definite article την present before πολιν, “city.”  Here are some translations from the Textus Receptus:

KJV

Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.

NKJV

Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria and preached Christ to them.

MEV

Philip went down to the city of Samaria and preached Christ to them.

 

The UBS / NA text reads, εις την πολιν της Σαμαρειας, with the definite article την present before “city.”

Here are some translations reputedly from the UBS text:

NIV, TNIV

Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah there.

RSV

Philip went down to a city of Samaria, and proclaimed to them the Christ.

HCSB

Philip went down to a city in Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah to them.

CEB

Philip went down to a city in Samaria and began to preach Christ to them.

CJB

Now Philip went down to a city in Shomron and was proclaiming the Messiah to them;

NABRE

Thus Philip went down to [the] city of Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah to them.

NASB

Philip went down to the city of Samaria and began proclaiming Christ to them.

ESV

Philip went down to the city of Samaria and proclaimed to them the Christ.

NRSV

Philip went down to the city of Samaria and proclaimed the Messiah to them.

GNT

Philip went to the principal city in Samaria and preached the Messiah to the people there.

MOUNCE

Philip went down to the main city of Samaria and began proclaiming to them the Christ.

NET

Philip went down to the main city of Samaria and began proclaiming the Christ to them.

πολις της Σαμαρειας, for the city of Samaria had been utterly destroyed by Hyrcanus, and the city built by Herod on its site was called Σεβαστη, that is, Augusta, in honour of Augustus. Samaria comprised the tract of country formerly occupied by the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, west of Jordan, lying between Judea and Galilee, beginning, says Josephus, at Ginea in the great plain, and ending at the toparchy of Acrabateni.

The manuscripts:
txt πολιν C D E H P Ψ 049 056 33 1611 1739 1891 cop-sa,bo,meg chrys TR RP την πολιν 𝔓⁷⁴ ℵ A B 1175 SBL [NA28] {C} lac 𝔓⁴⁵ L

 

 

Victor of Antioch on Mark 16 vv. 9-20

Victor of Antioch (5th century) in his commentary on the gospel of Mark admits that the verses 16:9-20 “do not appear in the existing Gospel with most copies.”  But he says that the better Palestinian copies included it, and he and others added together what material was in the Palestinian gospel about the Resurrection, to the other copies.  This comment appears in many minuscules.  [Note that Victor is not saying “Egyptian manuscripts” lack the Longer Ending of Mark.  He is ‘of Antioch.’]

Victor of Antioch‘s pertinent Greek text from Cramer’s Catena Vol. 1:

Εἰ δὲ καὶ τὸ,”αναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ” μετὰ τὰ ἐπιφερόμενα παρὰ πλείστοις ἀντιγράφοις οὐ κεῖνται ἐν τῷ παρόντι Εὐαγγελίῳ, ὡς νόθα νομίσαντες αὐτὰ εἶναι, ἀλλ’ ἡμεις ἐξ ἀκριβῶν ἀντιγράφων ἐν πλείστοις εὑρόντες αὐτὰ, καὶ κατὰ τὸ Παλαιστιναῖον Εὐαγγέλιον, ὡς ἔχει ἡ ἀλήθεια Μάρκου, συντεθείκαμεν καὶ τὴν ἐν αὐτῷ ἐπιφερομένην δεσποτικὴν ἀνάστασιν, μετὰ τὸ “ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ,” τουτέστιν ἀπὸ τοῦ “αναστὰς δὲ πρωῒ πρώτῃ σαββάτου” καὶ καθ’ ἑξῆς, μέχρι τοῦ “διὰ τῶν ἐπακολουθούντων σημείων.  Ἀμήν.”

Translation:

‘But even if the words “And having risen early” along with the words following, do not appear in the existing Gospel with most copies, as they are considered spurious, we however, having found them in most of the accurate copies, and in accordance with the Palestinian Gospel, exactly how the truth of Mark is, have added together also that in it, that follows the Master’s resurrection- after the words “for they were afraid,” that is, from “And having risen early on the first day of the week” and so on, up to the words “by the signs accompanying.  Amen.” ‘

You can download the PDF Gospel of Mark of mine from which I cut and pasted the above.

Papyrus 64/67 Readings in Matthew

The oldest Greek manuscript we have of any significant part of the Gospel of Matthew is probably Papyrus 64/67 (𝔓⁶⁴). Regarding Papyrus 64, there are 7 places where the Byzantine Robinson-Pierpont (RP) text and/or the Textus Receptus (TR) disagree with the Critical Text (CT), and where P64 is also extant:

5:20, CT and P64 read υμων η δικαιοσυνη, RP has η δικαιοσυνη υμων

5:22, CT and P64 read αυτου, RP reads αυτου εικη

5:25, CT and P64 read ο κριτης, RP reads ο κριτης σε παραδω

5:27, CT and P64 and RP read ερρεθη, TR reads ερρεθη τοις αρξαιοις (difference between TR and Robinson-Pierpont)

26:8, CT and P64 read μαθηται, RP reads μαθηται αυτου

26:22, CT reads εις εκαστος, RP reads εκαστος αυτων, but P64 omits both of these

26:23, CT and P64 read μετ εμου την χειρα εν τω τρυβλιω, RP reads μετ εμου εν τω τρυβλιω την χειρα

So, P64 agrees with CT 5 out of 7, agrees with CT and RP against TR 1 out of 7, and against both CT and RP 1 out of 7.

The only really significant variant is 5:22. CT and P64 say “angry with his brother,” and RP text says “angry with his brother without a cause”

5:27, CT and P64 and RP say “You have heard that it was said,” and TR says, “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago.”

26:22, CT says, “they began each one to say to him; RP says “they began each one of them to say to him,’ and P64 says “they began to say.”

Textus Receptus Revelation

I have completed and uploaded editions of the Revelation of John based on the Robinson-Pierpont Greek text, and also another one based on the Textus Receptus.  In addition, my previous eclectic edition of Revelation has added to it many more footnotes.  There are now 508 footnotes in these editions, showing the textual variants, and the ancient witness support for each.
Here you can download the Robinson-Pierpont edition of the Apocalypse of John
or the Textus Receptus edition of the Apocalypse of John

Accidental Scribal Addition

An Accidental Scribal Addition in DRP translation of Revelation

I finished translating the Apocalypse of John in April, 2006.  And now in August 2016, as I am making my TR and RP editions, I discovered a scribal error on my part.  In Rev. 16:11, I wrote in English “they reviled the name of the God of heaven.”  But the Greek only says ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸν θεὸν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, they reviled the God of heaven.  So, I made a scribal addition of the words “the name of.”  Even though my exemplar had the correct text.  Why did I accidentally do this?  Because two verses prior, the same word ἐβλασφήμησαν was followed by τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ, “they reviled the name of God,” and I was familiar with that phrase from just having translated that verse.  See immediately below my translation as it stood from April 2006 to August 2016.

16:9 καὶ ἐκαυματίσθησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι καῦμα μέγα, καὶ ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἔχοντος τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἐπὶ τὰς πληγὰς ταύτας, καὶ οὐ μετενόησαν δοῦναι αὐτῷ δόξαν.
⁹And the people were burned a very bad burn, and they reviled the name of God, the one having authority over these plagues; yet they did not repent to give him glory.

16:11 καὶ ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸν θεὸν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἐκ τῶν πόνων αὐτῶν καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἑλκῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ οὐ μετενόησαν ἐκ τῶν ἔργων αὐτῶν.
¹¹and they reviled the name of the God of heaven, because of their pains and because of their ulcers, yet they did not repent of their works.

I looked in Hoskier’s apparatus to find out if any ancient scribes made the same mistake which I did, and lo, two of them did indeed make the same addition.

The minuscule 1957 reads in v. 11, ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ, an exact duplication of the previous phrase in v. 9, even without the τοῦ οὐρανοῦ of v. 11.

The Philoxenian Syriac in v. 11 reads ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ.  My translation was an exact translation of the Philoxenian Syriac, without my knowledge or intent.

So, when you see the UBS Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament speculate that a phrase found in the BYZ text but not found in the UBS text, and they say it was added because of scribal familiarity with that phrase a couple verses prior, I can personally attest how that can and does happen.