Matthew 27:17

Matthew 27:17 @VIhsou/n to.n# Barabba/n {C}

The reading preserved today in several Greek manuscripts and early versions was known to Origen, who declares in his commentary on the passage, “In many copies it is not stated that Barabbas was also called Jesus, and perhaps [the omission is] right.” (Origen discloses in what follows his reason for disapproving of the reading Jesus Barabbas; it cannot be right, he implies, because “in the whole range of the scriptures we know that no one who is a sinner [is called] Jesus.”)

In a tenth century uncial manuscript (S) and in about twenty minuscule manuscripts a marginal comment states: “In many ancient copies which I have met with I found Barabbas himself likewise called ‘Jesus’; that is, the question of Pilate stood there as follows, Ti,na qe,lete avpo. tw/n du,o avpolu,sw u`mi/n( VIhsou/n to.n Barabba/n h' VIhsou/n to.n lego,menon Cristo,n; for apparently the paternal name of the robber was ‘Barabbas,’ which is interpreted ‘Son of the teacher.’” This scholium, which is usually assigned in the manuscripts either to Anastasius bishop of Antioch (perhaps latter part of the sixth century) or to Chrysostom, is in one manuscript attributed to Origen, who may indeed be its ultimate source.

In ver. Matthew 27:17 the word VIhsou/n could have been accidentally added or deleted by transcribers owing to the presence of u`mi/n before it (umini=n=). Furthermore, the reading of B 1010 (to.n Barabba/n) appears to presuppose in an ancestor the presence of VIhsou/n.

A majority of the Committee was of the opinion that the original text of Matthew had the double name in both verses and that VIhsou/n was deliberately suppressed in most witnesses for reverential considerations. In view of the relatively slender external support for VIhsou/n, however, it was deemed fitting to enclose the word within square brackets.