LUKE 12:14 krith.n h' meristh,n {B} The multiplicity of variant readings has arisen from the rarity of meristh,j (which occurs nowhere else in the Greek Bible), from the recollection of Exodus 2:14 ti,j se kate,sthsen a;rconta kai. dikasth,n* (quoted in Acts 7:27 and Acts 7:35), and from the possib... [ Continue Reading ]
LUKE 12:21 _include verse_ {A} The omission of ver. Luke 12:21 from D ita, b, d must be accidental, for the weight of external evidence attesting its inclusion is overwhelming. Furthermore, a careful author such as Luke would not be likely to pass directly from ei=pen of ver. Luke 12:20 to ei=pen... [ Continue Reading ]
LUKE 12:22 maqhta.j @auvtou/# {C} In accordance with Lukan usage, a majority of the Committee preferred to adopt auvtou/, supported as it is by the overwhelming preponderance of external evidence, but to enclose it within square brackets in view of its absence from several important early witnesse... [ Continue Reading ]
LUKE 12:27 auvxa,nei\ ouv kopia|/ ouvde. nh,qei {B} After some hesitation a majority of the Committee rejected the reading of D itd syrc, s al, ou;te nh,qei ou;te u`fai,nei (“they neither spin nor weave”), as a stylistic refinement introduced by copyists in view of the following reference to Solom... [ Continue Reading ]
LUKE 12:31 auvtou/ {B} It is more likely that auvtou/ was replaced by tou/ qeou/ (as has in fact happened in codex Bezae) than vice versa. The reading tou/ qeou/ kai. th.n dikaiosu,nhn auvtou/ is an intrusion from the parallel in Matthew 6:33. One of the idiosyncrasies of the scribe of î75 is his... [ Continue Reading ]
LUKE 12:39 ouvk {B} The original Lukan text seems to have lacked evgrhgo,rhsen a'n kai,. Scribes would have been almost certain to assimilate the shorter reading (preserved in î75 a* _al_) to the longer reading found in the parallel passage ( Matthew 24:43), whereas there is no good reason that wo... [ Continue Reading ]
LUKE 12:56 pw/j ouvk oi;date dokima,zein {B} Although it is possible that copyists inserted oi;date in conformity with the preceding clause, it is more probable that they omitted the word in order to heighten Jesus’ condemnation (“Why do you not know how to interpret…?” implies a lack of knowledge... [ Continue Reading ]