According to Bruce Metzger, "There can be little doubt that the words are spurious here, being omitted by the earliest witnesses representing several textual types. It is not found in any manuscript before the 5th century. It is found in some other sources, not quite so ancient, such as D, K, W, X, and the Latin Vulgate. Reason: This verse is lacking in א, B, L (original handwriting), θ, ƒ 1, ƒ 13, some old Italic, Syriac, Coptic and Georgian manuscripts, and such ancient sources as the Apostolic Canons, Eusebius, Jerome, and others.KJV: "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.".It is believed to have been assimilated from Mark. It is, however, found in this place in some Greek mss not quite so ancient – C, D, K, L – as well as some other mss of the ancient versions. Reason: The verse closely resembles Mark 9:29, but it is lacking in Matthew in א (original handwriting), B, θ, some Italic, Syriac, Coptic and Ethiopic manuscripts. KJV: "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.".The sixteen omitted verses Matthew 17:21 In most instances another verse, elsewhere in the New Testament and remaining in modern versions, is very similar to the verse that was omitted because of its doubtful provenance. Bloomfield wrote in 1832: "Surely, nothing dubious ought to be admitted into 'the sure word' of 'The Book of Life'." The King James Only movement, which believes that only the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible (1611) in English is the true word of God, has sharply criticized these translations for the omitted verses. The sentiment was articulated (but not originated) by what Rev. Įditors who exclude these passages say these decisions are motivated solely by evidence as to whether the passage was in the original New Testament or had been added later. Some Greek editions published well before the 1881 Revised Version made similar omissions. The citations of manuscript authority use the designations popularized in the catalog of Caspar René Gregory, and used in such resources (which are also used in the remainder of this article) as Souter, Nestle-Aland, and the UBS Greek New Testament (which gives particular attention to "problem" verses such as these). Some of these lists of "missing verses" specifically mention "sixteen verses" – although the lists are not all the same. Lists of "missing" verses and phrases go back to the Revised Version and to the Revised Standard Version, without waiting for the appearance of the NIV (1973). Scholars have generally regarded these verses as later additions to the original text.Īlthough many lists of missing verses specifically name the New International Version as the version that omits them, these same verses are missing from the main text (and mostly relegated to footnotes) in the Revised Version of 1881 (RV), the American Standard Version of 1901, the Revised Standard Version of 1947 (RSV), the Today's English Version (the Good News Bible) of 1966, and several others. New Testament verses not included in modern English translations are verses of the New Testament that exist in older English translations (primarily the King James Version), but do not appear or have been relegated to footnotes in later versions. See also: Textual variants in the New Testament
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |