Matthew 21:28

From Textus Receptus

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→English Translations)
Line 14: Line 14:
==Commentary==
==Commentary==
 +
===Scrivener on Matthew 21:38===
 +
This section (Scrivener, Intro. pg 331-334) discusses Matthew 21:28-31. Here Scrivener shows Lachmann (1848) has incorrectly applied Bengel's Canon, "Prefer the harder reading", by introducing an absurdity into the text and making the wrong son obediant to his father.
 +
 +
:"...critical conjecture, as usual, is his (Lachmann's) panacea. Conjecture, however, is justly held inadmissable by Tregelles, whose mode of interpretation is a curiosity in its (own) way. (see Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text, p 107). I entertain sincere veneration for the character and services of Dr. Tregelles, but it is only right to assert at once that what stands in his (own, i.e., Tregelles') text is impossible Greek.
 +
:... Why then prefer nonsense, for the mere purpose of carrying out Bengel's canon to the extremity? (Tregelle's text) is sanctioned by no critical authority whatsoever. (italics, Scrivener)
 +
Codex B indeed has usteroV (which is here followed by Westcott and Hort), Codex 4 (has) deuteroV, Codd. 13, 69, 124, 346 (Abbott's family 13), and 238, 262, 556, 604, perhaps others, esxatoV, one or other of which is in the Jerusalem Syriac and Bohairic, the Ethiopic (2 mss.), the Armenian and 2 chief Arabic versions; but all of these authorities (with tol. of the Vulgate secunda manu (second hand), as also Isidore, the Pseudo-Athanasius, and John Damascus), transpose the order of the two sons in vv. 29-30, so that the result produces just the same sense as in the Recieved (traditional text).
 +
The suggestion that the clauses were transferred in order to reconcile (either reading) with the context may be met by the counter-statement that either reading itself was just as likely to be substituted to suit the inversion of clauses. Against such inversion (which we do not pretend to recommend, though Westcott and Hort adopt it) Origen is an early witness, so that Codex B and its allies are no doubt wrong.
 +
:...The indefensible part of Tregelles' arrangement is that... the only true supporters of his general view are Codex D - aisxatoV (i.e, esxatoV), the Old Latin copies a b e ff 1.2 g1 h, l, the best codices of the Vulgate ( am.fuld.for.san.tol.harl.*), the Anglo-Saxon version, and Augustine, though not the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.
 +
:...On no true principles can codex D and its Latin allies avail against such a mass of opposing proof, whereof Codd. א, C, Φ, Σ, L, X lead the van. Even the Curetonian Syriac, which so often favours Codex D and the Old Latin, is with the Textus Receptus here. "
 +
(Scrivener, Intro.Vol. 2, pg 332f)
==Greek==
==Greek==

Revision as of 12:54, 9 March 2016

  • ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 21:28 Τί δὲ ὑμῖν δοκεῖ ἄνθρωπος εἶχεν τέκνα δύο καὶ προσελθὼν τῷ πρώτῳ εἶπεν Τέκνον ὕπαγε σήμερον ἐργάζου ἐν τῷ ἀμπελῶνι μου

(Textus Receptus, Theodore Beza, 1598)

  • Matthew 21:28 But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard.

(King James Version, Pure Cambridge Edition)

  • Matthew 21:28 “But what do you think? A certain man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’

(Textus Receptus Version)

Contents

Interlinear

Commentary

Scrivener on Matthew 21:38

This section (Scrivener, Intro. pg 331-334) discusses Matthew 21:28-31. Here Scrivener shows Lachmann (1848) has incorrectly applied Bengel's Canon, "Prefer the harder reading", by introducing an absurdity into the text and making the wrong son obediant to his father.

"...critical conjecture, as usual, is his (Lachmann's) panacea. Conjecture, however, is justly held inadmissable by Tregelles, whose mode of interpretation is a curiosity in its (own) way. (see Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text, p 107). I entertain sincere veneration for the character and services of Dr. Tregelles, but it is only right to assert at once that what stands in his (own, i.e., Tregelles') text is impossible Greek.
... Why then prefer nonsense, for the mere purpose of carrying out Bengel's canon to the extremity? (Tregelle's text) is sanctioned by no critical authority whatsoever. (italics, Scrivener)

Codex B indeed has usteroV (which is here followed by Westcott and Hort), Codex 4 (has) deuteroV, Codd. 13, 69, 124, 346 (Abbott's family 13), and 238, 262, 556, 604, perhaps others, esxatoV, one or other of which is in the Jerusalem Syriac and Bohairic, the Ethiopic (2 mss.), the Armenian and 2 chief Arabic versions; but all of these authorities (with tol. of the Vulgate secunda manu (second hand), as also Isidore, the Pseudo-Athanasius, and John Damascus), transpose the order of the two sons in vv. 29-30, so that the result produces just the same sense as in the Recieved (traditional text). The suggestion that the clauses were transferred in order to reconcile (either reading) with the context may be met by the counter-statement that either reading itself was just as likely to be substituted to suit the inversion of clauses. Against such inversion (which we do not pretend to recommend, though Westcott and Hort adopt it) Origen is an early witness, so that Codex B and its allies are no doubt wrong.

...The indefensible part of Tregelles' arrangement is that... the only true supporters of his general view are Codex D - aisxatoV (i.e, esxatoV), the Old Latin copies a b e ff 1.2 g1 h, l, the best codices of the Vulgate ( am.fuld.for.san.tol.harl.*), the Anglo-Saxon version, and Augustine, though not the Clementine edition of the Vulgate.
...On no true principles can codex D and its Latin allies avail against such a mass of opposing proof, whereof Codd. א, C, Φ, Σ, L, X lead the van. Even the Curetonian Syriac, which so often favours Codex D and the Old Latin, is with the Textus Receptus here. "

(Scrivener, Intro.Vol. 2, pg 332f)

Greek

Textus Receptus

Desiderius Erasmus

Colinæus

Stephanus (Robert Estienne)

Theodore Beza

See Also Matthew 1:1 Beza 1598 (Beza)

  • 1604 (Beza Octavo 5th)

Elzevir

Scholz

Scrivener

  • 1894 (? ????? ???T???)

Other Greek

  • 1857 (Tregelles' Greek New Testament)
  • (Tischendorf 8th Ed.)
  • 1881 (Westcott & Hort)
  • (Greek orthodox Church)

Anglo Saxon Translations

  • 1000 (Anglo-Saxon Gospels Manuscript 140, Corpus Christi College by Aelfric)
  • 1200 (Anglo-Saxon Gospels Hatton Manuscript 38, Bodleian Library by unknown author)

English Translations

  • 1395 But what semeth to you? A man hadde twey sones; and he cam to the firste, and seide, Sone, go worche this dai in my vyneyerd. (Wyclif's Bible by John Wycliffe)
  • 1534 What saye ye to this? A certayne man had two sonnes and came to ye elder and sayde: sonne go and worke to daye in my vineyarde. (Tyndale Bible by William Tyndale)
  • 1535 But what thinke ye? A certayne man had two sonnes, and came to the first, and sayde: Go thy waye my sonne, & worke to daye in my vynyarde. (Coverdale Bible)
  • 1540 What saye ye to this? A man had two sonnes, & cam to the fyrst, & sayde: sonne, go & worke to daye in my vineyarde. (Great Bible Second Edition - Miles Coverdale)
  • 1549 What saye ye to thys? A certayne man had two sonnes, and came to the elder and sayde: sonne go and worke to daye in my vyneyarde. (Matthew's Bible - John Rogers)
  • 1568 But what thynke you? A man had two sonnes, and came to the firste, and saide: sonne, go and worke to day in my vineyarde. (Bishop's Bible First Edition
  • 1611 But what thinke you? A certaine man had two sonnes, and he came to the first, and said, Sonne, goe worke to day in my vineyard. (King James Version)
  • 1729 But what do you think of this? a man had two sons, and coming to the first, he said, son, go, work to-day in my vineyard. (Mace New Testament)
  • 1745 But what think you? A man had two sons, and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in the vineyard. (Mr. Whiston's Primitive New Testament)
  • 1770 But what think ye of this? There was a man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, Son, go, work to day in my vineyard: (Worsley Version by John Worsley)
  • 1790 But what think you? A man had two sons; and coming to the first, he said, son, go work to day in my vineyard. (Wesley Version by John Wesley)
  • 1795 But what think ye? A man had two sons; and coming to the first he said, Son, go work to-day in my vineyard. (A Translation of the New Testament from the Original Greek by Thomas Haweis)
  • 1833 But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go, work to-day in my vineyard. (Webster Version - by Noah Webster)
  • 1835 But what do you think of this? A man had two sons, and addressing his elder son, said, Son, go work today in any vineyard. (Living Oracles by Alexander Campbell)
  • 1851 (Murdock Translation)
  • 1858 But what do you think? A man had two sons; and he went to the first, and said, Son, go and work to-day in the vineyard. (The New Testament Translated from the Original Greek by Leicester Sawyer)
  • 1865 But what think ye? A man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said: Son, go work to-day in the vineyard. (The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ 1865 by American Bible Union)
  • 1869 But what think ye? A man had two sons: he came to the first, and said, Son, go, work today in the vineyard. (Noyes Translation by George Noyes)
  • 1885 But what think ye? A man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work today in the vineyard. (Revised Version also called English Revised Version - Charles Ellicott editor)
  • 1890 But what think ye? A man had two children, and coming to the first he said, Child, go to-day, work in [my] vineyard. (Darby Version 1890 by John Darby)
  • 1902 But how, to you, doth it seem? A man, had two sons: coming unto the first, he said, Son! go thy way, today, be working in the vineyard. (The Emphasised Bible Rotherham Version)
  • 1902 What seems to you? A man had two sons; and going to the first, he said, Child, go to-day, work in my vineyard. (Translation of the New Testament from the Original Greek by William Godbey)
  • 1904 "But what think ye? A man had two children; and to the first, he said, 'Child, go, work today in the vineyard.' (The New Testament: Revised and Translated by Adolphus Worrell)
  • 1904 What do you think of this? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the elder and said 'Go and work in the vineyard to-day, my son.' (Twentieth Century New Testament by Ernest Malan and Mary Higgs)
  • 1911 (Syrus Scofield)
  • 1912 "But give me your judgement. There was a man who had two sons. He came to the elder of them, and said, "'My son, go and work in the vineyard to-day.' (Weymouth New Testament)
  • 1918 But what think you? A man had two sons; coming to the first he said: Son, go, work today in the vineyard. (The New Testament Translated from the Sinaitic Manuscript by Henry Anderson)
  • 1923 (Edgar Goodspeed)

Foreign Language Versions

Arabic

  • ماذا تظنون. كان لانسان ابنان فجاء الى الاول وقال يا ابني اذهب اليوم اعمل في كرمي. (Arabic Smith & Van Dyke)

Aramaic

  • ܡܢܐ ܕܝܢ ܡܬܚܙܐ ܠܟܘܢ ܓܒܪܐ ܚܕ ܐܝܬ ܗܘܘ ܠܗ ܒܢܝܐ ܬܪܝܢ ܘܩܪܒ ܠܘܬ ܩܕܡܝܐ ܘܐܡܪ ܠܗ ܒܪܝ ܙܠ ܝܘܡܢܐ ܦܠܘܚ ܒܟܪܡܐ ܀ (Aramaic Peshitta)

Basque

  • Baina cer irudi çaiçue, Guiçon batec cituen bi seme: eta hurbilduric lehenagana, erran ceçan, Semé habil, egun trabailla adi ene mahastian:

Bulgarian

  • 1940 Но как ви се вижда? Един човек имаше два сина; дойде при първия и му рече: Синко, иди работи днес на лозето. (Bulgarian Bible)

Chinese

  • 1 又 说 ： 一 个 人 有 两 个 儿 子 。 他 来 对 大 儿 子 说 ： 我 儿 ， 你 今 天 到 葡 萄 园 里 去 做 工 。 (Chinese Union Version (Simplified))
  • 1 又 說 ： 一 個 人 有 兩 個 兒 子 。 他 來 對 大 兒 子 說 ： 我 兒 ， 你 今 天 到 葡 萄 園 裡 去 做 工 。 (Chinese Union Version (Traditional))

French

  • Mais que vous en semble? Un homme avait deux enfants; et venant au premier, il dit: Mon enfant, va aujourd'hui travailler dans ma vigne. (French Darby)
  • 1744 Mais que vous semble? Un homme avait deux fils, et venant au premier, il lui dit : mon fils, va-t'en, et travaille aujourd'hui dans ma vigne. (Martin 1744)
  • 1744 Mais que vous semble-t-il de ceci? Un homme avait deux fils, et, s'adressant au premier, il lui dit: Mon fils, va, et travaille aujourd'hui dans ma vigne. (Ostervald 1744)

German

  • 1545 Was dünket euch aber? Es hatte ein Mann zwei Söhne und ging zu dem ersten und sprach: Mein Sohn, gehe hin und arbeite heute in meinem Weinberge. (Luther 1545)
  • 1871 Was dünkt euch aber? Ein Mensch hatte zwei Kinder; und er trat hin zu dem ersten und sprach: Kind, gehe heute hin, arbeite in meinem Weinberge. (Elberfelder 1871)
  • 1912 Was dünkt euch aber? Es hatte ein Mann zwei Söhne und ging zu dem ersten und sprach: Mein Sohn, gehe hin und arbeite heute in meinem Weinberg. (Luther 1912)

Italian

  • 1649 ORA, che vi par egli? Un uomo avea due figliuoli; e, venuto al primo, disse: Figliuolo, va’, lavora oggi nella mia vigna. (Giovanni Diodati Bible 1649)
  • 1927 Or che vi par egli? Un uomo avea due figliuoli. Accostatosi al primo disse: Figliuolo, va’ oggi a lavorare nella vigna. (Riveduta Bible 1927)

Japanese

Latin

  • quid autem vobis videtur homo habebat duos filios et accedens ad primum dixit fili vade hodie operare in vinea mea Latin Vulgate
  • 1527 (Erasmus 1527)
  • 1527 (Erasmus Vulgate 1527)

Pidgin

  • 1996 (Pidgin King Jems)

Romainian

  • 2010 Ce credeţi? Un om avea doi feciori; şi s'a dus la cel dintîi, şi i -a zis: ,Fiule, du-te astăzi de lucrează în via mea!` (Biblia Traducerea Fidela în limba româna)

Russian

  • 1876 А как вам кажется? У одного человека было два сына; и он, подойдя к первому, сказал: сын! пойди сегодня работай в винограднике моем. Russian Synodal Version

Phonetically:

Spanish

  • Mas, ¿qué os parece? Un hombre tenía dos hijos, y llegando al primero, le dijo: Hijo, ve hoy á trabajar en mi viña. (RVG Spanish)

Swedish

  • 1917 Men vad synes eder? En man hade två söner. Och han kom till den förste och sade: 'Min son, gå i dag och arbeta i vingården.' (Swedish - Svenska 1917)

Tagalog

  • 1905 Datapuwa't ano sa akala ninyo? Isang taong may dalawang anak; at lumapit siya sa una, at sinabi, Anak, pumaroon at gumawa ka ngayon sa ubasan. (Ang Dating Biblia 1905)

Tok Pisin

  • 1996 (Tok Pisin King Jems)

Vietnamese

  • 1934 Các ngươi nghĩ làm sao? Một người kia có hai đứa con trai; nói cùng đứa thứ nhứt, mà rằng: Con ơi, bữa nay con hãy ra làm vườn nho. (VIET)

See Also

External Links

Retrieved from "http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Matthew_21:28"
Personal tools