I am going to go by Philip w.Comfort's book : New Testament Text and Translation Commentary. I will not necessarily quote all of his findings.
3:22a
WH NU :Moses indeed said
variant/TR : for Moses indeed said to the fathers
"The WH NU has outstanding manuscript support. The expanded text,in whatever form,is a natural extension,perhaps influenced by 3:13 and 3:25." (p.340)
4:24b
WH NU :Master,you who made the heaven
variant/TR : Master,you are the God who made heaven
The variant is a scribal expansion,probably intended to heighten the believers' adoration in prayer or imitate prayers found in Exod 20:11;Ps 146:6;Isa 37:16-20. (p.344)
5:33
The verb decided suits the context better than took council because the scene depicts a rash action motivated by rage rather than a rational decision motivated by judiciousness. (p.350)
5:34
WH NU : the men
var/TR : the apostles
According to WH NU,which have excellent testimony,a full translation is,"He [Gamaliel]commanded the men to be put outside for awhile." (p.350)
6:8a
WH NU : full of grace and power
var/TR : full of faith and power
var2 : full of grace and faith and power
The WH NU reading has extraordinarily good documentary support...The variants are the result of scribal harmonization and expansion. (p.353,354)
6:13
WH NU : he never stops saying things
var/TR : he never stops saying blasphemous things
The scribal insertion in TR of the word "blasphemous"heightens the accusation against Stephen. (p.355)
7:37
WH NU : at end of verse,omit ("hear him")
var/TR : at end of verse add ("hear him")
The WH NU has the support of the four earliest manuscripts,as well as the majority of manuscripts. (p.358,359)
9:18
WH NU : he saw again
var/TR : he saw again instantly
The manuscript evidence for the WH NU reading is vastly superior to that for TR...It is a case of overload to add "instantly" after ("immediately"). (p.366)
Some Textual Variants In The Book Of Acts
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Rippon, Oct 21, 2011.
-
-
10:6
WH NU : conclude verse with :who is in a house by the sea
var/TR : add at end of verse :this one will tell you what to do
"The manuscript evidence is vastly superior to that of the two variants." (p.369)
10:12
WH NU : reptiles of the earth and birds
var/TR : reptiles and beasts and birds
"The manuscript evidence for the WH NU reading is superior to that for the TR." He goes on to say that there is scribal harmonization with 11:6 in the TR text. (p.369)
11:12
WH NU : without making a distinction
var/TR : without doubting [or,with no hesitation]
Comfort says that the WH NU has good documentary support --but the TR reading and another variant have weak support. The TR variant "reflects scribal assimilation to 10:20." (p.375)
15:7
WH NU : God made a choice among you
var/TR : God made a choice among us
The WH NU has excellent testimony. (389)
15:24
WH NU : unsettling your minds
var/TR : unsettling your souls by saying [it is necessary]to be circumcised and to keep the law
"[T]his is but another example of unnecessary gap-filling,which found its way into TR and KJV." (p.392) -
16:7
WH NU : the Spirit of Jesus
va/TR : the Spirit
"The WH NU reading is backed by both early and diverse documentary evidence." (p.396)
16:17
WH NU : they are proclaiming to you
var/TR : they are proclaiming to us
"The reading of TR is based on inferior manuscript support." (p.398)
17:5
WH NU : the Jews
var/TR : the Jews not being obedient (= the unbelieving Jews)
"The WH NU reading has the backing of six excellent manuscripts,as well as the Coptic. The variant shows a bit of pedantic gap-filling..." (p.401)
18:5
WH NU : Paul was occupied with the word
var/TR : Paul was occupied in the Spirit
"The documentary evidence strongly supports the WH NU reading,as does the context..." (p.406)
21:8
WH Nu : we came into Caesara
var/TR : they who were accompanying Paul came into Caesarea
"The words were added to the beginning of thsi verse in the majority of late manuscripts to identify the subject...Even the KJV and NKJV translators did not follow this reading precisely;instead rendering it..'we who were accompanying Paul came into Caesarea.' "(p.417)
23:9
WH NU : And what if a spirit or an angel spoke to him?
var/TR : And what if a spirit or an angel spoke to him? Let us not fight against God.
"This interpolation was included in TR and then translated in KJV and NKJV." (p.421)
24:6-8
WH NU : omit 24:6b-8a
var/TR : add 24:6b-8a :And we would have judged him according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came and with great violence took him out of our hands,commanding his accusers to come before you.
Comfort says this is yet another case of gap-filling. It's an interpolation that tries to add an explanation. (p.423,424)
24:26
WH NU : [hoping]money might be given to him by Paul
var/TR : [hoping]money might be given to him by Paul so that he might release him
"The WH NU reading has vastly superior documentary support than that behind TR. The majority of manuscripts display a natural scribal expansion here." (p.425) -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Hello Rippon,
I'm not quite sure why you're posting all this stuff.
First of all, the examples show how very little difference the variants make to our understanding of the text, and secondly, your man Comfort (so far as you've quoted him) gives no reasoning to support his assertions which seem to me to be quite groundless. I could maintain the opposite with just as much logic. I'm afraid I don't find him the meast bit persuasive.
On almost all the examples, if you go to the textual apparatus of your Greek N.T., you will find the little word byz supporting the T.R. This means that the vast majority of the extant texts support what Comfort is pleased to call the 'variant.' I am not prepared to discard 95% of the extant manuscripts in order to agree with Comfort. Sorry!
There is one place where the Critical Text agrees with the majority against the T.R.
Steve -
-
The variant reading is the result of scribes filling out an OT citation to bring it into conformity with Deut 18:15,as well as Acts 18:15,as well as Acts 3:22,which has the same quotation. The filled-out reading is as follows: "This is the Moses who said to the sons of Israel,'the Lord God will raise up a prophet for you from your own brothers,as he raised me up. Hear him.'" TR adds "Lord" (supported by C E H P and other MSS)before "God." (Comfort p.359) -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Steve -
A Tally
It might be interesting to total the number of times that the TR agreed with the WH and NU in the book of Acts as far as variants are concerned.
1:26 : TR WH NU
2:5 : TR WH NU
2:16 : TR WH NU
3:6 : TR NU
3:13a : TR WH
4:1 : TR NU
4:6 : TR WH NU
5:17 : TR WH NU
5:28 : TR NU
6:7a : TR WH NU
7:43a : TR NU
8:39 : TR WH NU
9:17 : TR WH NU
10:19 : TR NU
11:20 : TR WH NU
13:18 : TR WH NU
13:33b : TR WH NU
13:44 : TR WH
13:48 : TR NU
14:25a : TR WH NU
15:20c : TR WH NU
16:32 : TR NU
17:4 : TR WH NU
17:28 : TR WH NU
20:28a : TR WH NU
21:11 : TR WH NU
So according to these results the WH agreed with the TR 19 times when it comes to variants. The NU agreed with the TR on 24 occasions. -
In 9:18 the TR,WH, and NU did not use the TR.
In Acts 10:6 WH NU went with the Maj Text. However it also used P74 Sinaiticus A B C 1739.
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Actually, I have no dog in this fight. If you can convince me that I should rely on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, it would make life much easier for me.
I think it might be good to take a long look at the T.R., especially in Revelation. This should be done at the same time as a fresh revision of the KJV which would remove some of the weaknesses of the NKJV. However, do you think that Sinaiticus has no scribal errors in it? Scrivener described it as "Roughly written.......full of gross transcriptural blunders....leaving out whole lines of the original."
Steve -
The TR tends to add a lot to the original texts.I went through a number of passages from just two pages of Matthew last night. There were a number of Old Testament citations. Usually they were not citing in the fuller way it was said in the O.T.
Check these out with your trusty NKJV:
2:6 quoting Micah 5:2
2:15 quoting Hosea 11:1
2:18 quoting Jer. 31:15
3:3 quoting Isa. 40:3
4:6 quoting Ps. 91:11,12
4:7 quoting Deut. 6:16
4:10 quoting Deut. 6:13
4:16 quoting Is. 9:1,2
When Jesus or any author of the New Testament quotes from the Old Testament it is rarely a complete citation --sometimes it is very much paraphrased and in altered form from the original writing made centuries before.
Therefore your contention that one needs a translation with "hear Him" is very much in doubt Steve. And especially so since the four earliest manuscripts did not include it. -
But look also at the findings of other New Testament textual scholars such as Black,Fee,Epp,Holmes and Wallace.
I know that the Byzantine is not equivalent to the TR,but I thought I'd give you a bone. :)
The TR though is not that reliable with respect to the book of Revelation. You don't think that one 12th century manuscript that Erasmus depended upon was that trustworthy,do you? A lot of the TR readings are textually spurious.
But Sin.(for short,don't read anything into it) was rather diligent most of the time.
In general the TR and the Byz texts are smoother than the Alexandrian. That should raise suspicions. If readings are less polished it would seem to indicate that they are the ones closer to the originals.