Matt 9:13

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by evangelist6589, Jun 22, 2014.

  1. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,364
    Likes Received:
    105
    Was reading and discovered that Matt 9:13 adds the word repentance in the authorized version which is missing from the NIV 1984 & the ESV. I am not sure of the other versions as I have not checked them. This is a crucial word and since I am not a textual critic but an evangelist I do not understand this side of theology so can someone explain this to me? Thanks.
     
  2. prophet

    prophet
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2010
    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    2
    Yeah. The AV was here first.
     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,293
    Likes Received:
    783
    I will no longer be using the ESV for that very reason.
     
  4. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,515
    Likes Received:
    49
    Hi Evangelist, the Critical Text does not have the "to repentance" at Matthew 9:13, nor at Mark 2:17, but the Byzantine Text and the TR (KJV, NKJV) have that phrase. Now people like me (CT advocates) will say some copist added the phrase to those to verses to make them read like Luke 5:32 in the Byzantine, whereas the Byzantine textform advocates will say the phrase was omitted from Matthew and Mark in the CT.

    However, from your perspective, it does not matter, because Luke 5:32 tells you that Jesus did come to call sinners to repentance, and so the fact is not in dispute at all.

    Here are some additional verses you might like to consider when pondering why Jesus came to call sinners to repentance, Acts 26:20, Romans 2:4, 2 Corinthians 7:9, Hebrews 6:6, and 2 Peter 3:9.

    Here is the footnote from the NET for Luke 5:32:
     
    #4 Van, Jun 22, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 22, 2014
  5. evangelist6589

    evangelist6589
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2010
    Messages:
    8,364
    Likes Received:
    105
    Yeah the NIV & ESV contain "repentance" in that verse but not the other one, and as you indicated its due to textual variants in the various MSS evidences. Its been a while since I studied textual criticism but thanks.
     
  6. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,023
    Likes Received:
    47
    The Niv and esv do have repentence taught in them, just not lining up exactly each passage with Kjv, based upon the manuscripts they used in translation!
     
  7. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,210
    Likes Received:
    192
    I think I figured out what you're asking here.

    Methods of textual criticism have canons, or rules as to how to decide what is genuine. One canon of the modern critical method going back to Westcott and Hort and continuing to the eclectic method of UBS4 is that the shorter reading is usually the correct one. The Byzantine Priority method and other Byz./Majority methods deny that this canon is valid. We say that the opposite is true: scribes are more likely to add words and phrases than to subtract them.

    In this case, the Alexandrian manuscripts leave out the word "repentance" in Matt. 9:13, therefore the critical texts, the basis for the NIV, ESV and most other modern translations, leave out "repentance." The Byzantine mss on the other hand include it, thus its inclusion in the Byzantine Textform Greek NT, the Hodges/Farstad Majority NT, the TR, etc.
     
  8. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,023
    Likes Received:
    47
    Exactly! Its not that those who translated the MV, using the Critical Greek text, were saying that there is no doctrine of repentence in the Bible, just that they did not view that word as being in the originals!
     
  9. jonathan.borland

    jonathan.borland
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,154
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Baptistboarders,

    I really suspect that this omission of "to repentance" in textual witnesses of both Matt 9:13 and Mark 2:17 originated in response to the scathing criticisms of Christianity's pagan critics in the second century, and in this case in response to Porphyry himself. Porphyry (via Macarius, Apocriticus 4.19) says:

    Porphyry mocks especially none other than Christ's words "to repentance" when he says that those who don't need healing are those who "repent" from the words of the Christians, and that the more they "repent" from Jesus' words, the more righteous and whole they become and the less they go astray and the less they need the Christians' "healing" and Christ's "calling."

    For some early scribe, by omitting the phraseology that had been most bitterly misconstrued by Christianity's brightest and severest early critic they could enter into the apologetic discourse and influence it more favorably in their direction.

    Sincerely,

    Jonathan C. Borland
     
  10. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,515
    Likes Received:
    49
    As I said, advocates of the Critical Text will say some copyist added "to repentance" at Matthew 9:13 and Mark 2:17 to make the verses read like Luke 5:32. But those advocates of the Byzantine text-form will say some copyist omitted "to repentance" in those two verse for whatever reason.

    But to the evangelist, the quibbling does not matter, because the fact that Jesus came to call sinners to repentance is not at issue.
     

Share This Page

Loading...