Metzger agreed with Authorized Version Translation

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Deacon, Mar 12, 2010.

  1. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,969
    Likes Received:
    128
    Interesting discussion in Metzger’s Textual Commentary of Acts 9:25.
    It appears that Metzger agreed with the Authorized version’s translation of the verse over more modern renditions despite the textual evidence to the contrary.

    Acts 9:23–25 (ESV)
    When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him,
    but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him,
    but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.

    Acts 9:25 (AV 1873)
    Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket.

    Bruce Metzger wrote:

    There are minor word order differences between the textus receptus and the critical text of the verse, these however don't fully resolve the problems between the translations.
    His solution, the Greek manuscripts contributing to both the TR and the NA27/UBS were corrupted.

    Rob
     
    #1 Deacon, Mar 12, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2010
  2. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,969
    Likes Received:
    128
    Okay, who gave the post 5 stars without commenting?

    Tell us why! :smilewinkgrin:

    Rob
     
  3. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's interesting, Rob. Thanks for posting it.

    (I did not give the five stars btw; I don't even know how to do that)
     
  4. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,208
    Likes Received:
    192
    Well, I was going to rate it and then say, "I'll rate it for you and then add a comment." But the BB tells me, "You have already rated this thread." So I'm the culprit! [​IMG] Don't know why I did it, except that we had a visitor from the States so I was busy that day. Tell you what, I'll go ahead and comment.

    First of all, the TR, Pierpont/Robinson Byzantine and Hodges/Farstad Majority all have exactly the same reading. So Metzger's comments show that maybe he just couldn't bear, at least at the time he wrote, to admit that the Byzantine/Majority is completely right here.

    Metzger's reading is one more case of the eclectic method producing readings that exist in no known mss. Again, this is a clear case where, as Metzger himself indicated, it is very obvious how the reading of the critical text/Alexandrian family was produced from the Byzantine.

    Here's an interesting wrench in the works which Metzger seems to have missed, though I'm not sure what it means. In lower case Greek, it would be so easy for a scribe to write the nu carelessly and make it look like an upsilon. However, the upper case nu and upsilon are a good deal different. And the original mss would have been all in upper case.
     
  5. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    I'm curious about whether the 4th edition is different from the 2nd edition here. I don't have the textual commentary in front of me...I keep my library at home...but I would be interested to see whether the committee changed on this in the last 15 years.
     

Share This Page

Loading...