Matthew 21:4

MATTHEW 21:4 profh,tou Several witnesses (Mmg 42 ita, c, h copboms Hilary) add Zacari,ou before or after profh,tou; other witnesses (vg4 mss copboms eth) prefix “Isaiah.”... [ Continue Reading ]

Matthew 21:12

MATTHEW 21:12 i`ero,n {B} The addition of tou/ qeou/ appears to be a natural expansion, made in order to emphasize the profanation of the holy place. The fact that the parallel passages ( Mark 11:15 and Luke 19:45; cf. John 2:14) lack tou/ qeou/ would not be an occasion for copyists, if they observ... [ Continue Reading ]

Matthew 21:29-31

MATTHEW 21:29-31 ouv qe,lw( u[steron de. metamelhqei.j avph/lqen … e`te,rw| … evgw,( ku,rie\ kai. ouvk avph/lqen … o` prw/toj {C} The textual transmission of the parable of the two sons is very much confused (see also the comment on 21.32). Is the recusant but subsequently obedient son mentioned fi... [ Continue Reading ]

Matthew 21:32

MATTHEW 21:32 ouvde, The confusion that marks the transmission of Matthew 21:29-31 seems to have affected also the text of the final clause of this verse. Instead of ouvde, (which is read by B O Q S F 0138 1 ¦13 22 33 157 543 565 700 892 1579 1582 most of the Old Latin vg copbo eth) other witnesses... [ Continue Reading ]

Matthew 21:39

MATTHEW 21:39 auvto.n evxe,balon e;xw tou/ avmpelw/noj kai. avpe,kteinan {A} The Western text (D Q ita, b, c, d, e, ff2, h, r1 geo Irenaeus Lucifer Juvencus) has been assimilated to the sequence in Mark, where the son is killed and then cast out of the vineyard ( Mark 12:8). Matthew and Luke ( Luke... [ Continue Reading ]

Matthew 21:44

MATTHEW 21:44 @Kai. … auto,n)# {C} Many modern scholars regard the verse as an early interpolation (from Luke 20:18) into most manuscripts of Matthew. On the other hand, however, the words are not the same, and a more appropriate place for its insertion would have been after ver. Matthew 21:42. Its... [ Continue Reading ]

Continues after advertising

Old Testament