Jump to content


Photo
* - - - - 11 votes

1904 Patriarchal Greek text and the Johannine Comma


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Paul Rittman

Paul Rittman

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts

Posted 28 May 2011 - 01:56 AM

I have seen (to my surprise) that the edition of the Greek New Testament produced in 1904 by the Greek Orthodox Church includes the Johannine Comma (1 John 5.7-8) that is not in the majority of the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament.

I've been told in email exchanges with people who seem to be knowledgeable about it that it was included because it was in some of the (later) Greek manuscripts that were consulted for the production of this edition, although it was not in the earlier Greek copies of 1 John.

Does anyone here know more about the decision to include this verse, or about the 1904 Patriarchal text itself? I'd love to do some research on it, but there really doesn't seem to be too much material out there.

#2 Bryan J. Maloney

Bryan J. Maloney

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 28 May 2011 - 03:33 AM

The introductory material for http://www.orthodox-...eobntpublic.pdf could help answer some questions.

#3 Paul Rittman

Paul Rittman

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 02:25 AM

Thanks, Bryan, but there was only about a page on that particular Greek text. I was looking for a bit more material.

#4 Bryan J. Maloney

Bryan J. Maloney

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 364 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 31 May 2011 - 04:04 AM

Part of the problem with "early" copies is that "early" doesn't necessarily mean "better". For quite some time, copies of Scripture were sufficiently rare that one simply could not set any aside for "archival" purposes. They were put to use. Thus, "early" copies that survive may have been flawed and rejected for use.

#5 Cyprian (Humphrey)

Cyprian (Humphrey)

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 314 posts

Posted 31 May 2011 - 03:10 PM

It's not directly related to the OP, but one may find this answer to a similar question about the Pericope Adulterae to be worthy of shedding some light.

http://www.monachos....ll=1#post101903

#6 Robert P Ruschak

Robert P Ruschak

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 11 August 2011 - 02:49 AM

There are two books I can recommend on the subject of textual criticism. Both are by Protestant authors, but very insightful, and both are supportive of the Majority Text.

"The King James Version Defended" by Th.D Edward F. Hills, which could be better titled The Textus Receptus Defended, or the Majority Text Defended. ISBN 0-915923-00-9

The other is "The Ecclesiastical Text" by Theodore P. Letus, Ph.D, ISBN 0-9658607-0-1

#7 Christophoros

Christophoros

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 04 September 2011 - 09:09 PM

"The polished 'Alexandrian text' [which does not contain the Johannine Comma] was strictly concerned with preserving uncontaminated the original text of works... The Alexandrian style of text is identified by the absence of aberration found in other groups, and was found throughout the Eastern Orthodox world.

"The 'Byzantine text', also called Syrian, Antiochene, Koine, and Received (Textus Receptus) [as well as the Patriarchal text], originated in the late third century around Antioch, and was adopted by Constantinople."

- The Orthodox New Testament, Vol. 1, pages 575-576.

"It's [the Patriarchal Text's] purpose is not to offer an always speculative reconstruction of the original autographs but to provide a uniform ecclesiastical text which is a reliable and accurate witness to the truth of the Christian faith."

- The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible, Vol. 3, p. 13.

Both these quotes from supplementary material found in the two English translations of the Patriarchal Greek text currently available indicate the PT is *not* the most accurate recreation of the original text of the New Testament, but simply the uniform text adopted by Greek-speaking churches. So, I would argue, the presence of the Johannine Comma in the PT should not be implied as supporting the contention it was contained in the original New Testament.

#8 Christophoros

Christophoros

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 405 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 21 April 2013 - 07:28 PM

"As regards the first epistle of John (5.7-8) about the three witnesses. This passage is missing from all ecclesiastical texts, all the texts of the Fathers and teachers of the Orthodox Church, from the ancient translations, from all known Greek manuscripts written independently of the addition that was introduced in the Vulgate. However, the current edition keeps this text following the opinion of the Holy Synod of the Great Church."

 

- An English summary of the 1904 Preface to the New Testament of the Ecumenical Patriarchate


Edited by Christophoros, 21 April 2013 - 07:28 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users