KJV vs NASB: Missing/Added Phrase???
While putting together the SS lesson, I was gathering together (For obvious reasons) a group of scriptures warning us clearly against setting dates. But in doing that, I came across something that I never saw before.
In Matt. 24:36, I would have sworn the KJV contained the phrase, NOT THE SON in the verse, ...not the angels of heaven, NOT THE SON but my father only. In the KJV it looks like this:
But in the NASB, which I have only recently began to use, it does have NOR THE SON. Oude Ho Huios. See below:
I've been using L4 in class recentely. No one in class uses Bible software of any kind at home. The majority of the group is over 45. So they're somewhat skeptical of the value of using L4 in a classroom setting. Skeptical, but not critical & rebellious. Something like this coming up, is not only interesting, but is an excellent example of the use of a Reverse Interlinear. Something they had never heard of or seen 3 months ago.
Understand, I'm not offended at the omission/addition, I just want to give the class a decent explanation for the difference. I think I could give a general reason for the difference, but I'd be guessing, & I know enough to be very dangerous about various manuscripts.
Soooooo... here is my question.
. Why did the translators of the KJV omit this? Why did the NASB trans. put it in? What were they looking at that caused them to make the choices they made.
Even if someone could point me to a reference, I'd be glad to do the work myself. (I have the day off, and it's pouring down rain here in Ohio, so I have a lot of free time).
On a side, funny note, usually we all have those "I can't believe, after all these years of reading the Bible, I NEVER SAW THAT BEFORE!! moments." But I'm having the exact opposite here. Im saying to myself, "I KNOW I'VE READ THAT IN THE KJV BEFORE."
I was so sure in my mind, I've been afraid to ask here on the forum, thinking I must be overlooking the obvious. When I've quoted that off the top of my head in the past, it was always with the phrase, nor the Son. Like I said above, I've only recentely began using the NASB as my main Bible. The KJV was my top Bible for many years.
Thank you for listening and thank you for the help.
Comments
-
this is a good question and L4 shines in answering questions like this!
I have a few things that are helpful....not necessarily in order....
- Metzger's textual commentary
- A students Guide to textual criticism
- the NET bible usually has translator's notes for things like this.
- Encountering the manuscripts
i know that there are more resources that are helpful...but i don't have them in my library...
I know others will chime in with their favorites.
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
Don Jenkins said:
In Matt. 24:36, I would have sworn the KJV contained the phrase, NOT THE SON in the verse, ...not the angels of heaven, NOT THE SON but my father only.
Try Mark 13:32 in the KJV.
0 -
The NET does shed a great deal of light on the subject. I've only recentely been discovering the great usefulness of the NET.
In it's notes, I saw that Mark 13:32 KJV does contain the phrase " neither the Son". You all probably heard me scream at myself, as I realized, that in my tunnel vision, it never occured to me to that it might be in the other Gospels. You'd think that would have been the first thing to come to mind!!!
Unfortunately, this tunnel vision happens alot with me. Fortunately, I'm easily shown the errors of my ways. But if no one is there to help, I'll lock onto one way and be unable to see any other line of thought for hours.
Thank you Robert for the extremely fast response. Didn't have the refs. you mentioned, other than NET. I think I have the basic? Scholar's??? I look forward to seeing others responses. And possibly finding other areas my tunnel vision affected. (If you think you keep hearing a loud scream this afternoon.........)
0 -
Hi Don
"Word Pictures in the New Testament" (available in Scholar's) does comment on this - but doesn't add to what the NET Notes show.
Graham
0 -
Peace to you, Don! And!
Always Joy in the Lord!
Thank you very much for your post.
You helped me find information that was very helpful.
Very interesting how the different translations render the verse.
I've come to the conclusion that the KJV is right. I must study this issue some more; however, it's the first instance where I do disagree with NA27.
You've probably done a comparison also; but, I thought I'd share mine.
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Don Jenkins said:
In it's notes, I saw that Mark 13:32 KJV does contain the phrase " neither the Son". You all probably heard me scream at myself, as I realized, that in my tunnel vision, it never occured to me to that it might be in the other Gospels. You'd think that would have been the first thing to come to mind!!!
Unfortunately, this tunnel vision happens alot with me. Fortunately, I'm easily shown the errors of my ways. But if no one is there to help, I'll lock onto one way and be unable to see any other line of thought for hours.
Don, you might want to reference Aland's Synopsis of the Four Gospels, it's a Logo resource and I always have it open when I'm studying the Gospels. And depending on your proficiency with Greek you might also want to reference Aland's Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum, not sure that's in Logos but the hardcopy is an execellent tool.
James
0 -
Peace to you, James!
Great idea! *smile*
In this case though, Aland seems to use the NA27 or a similar Greek Text.
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Sure enough (if you refer to a printed copy) that Aland would use the NA text. Our Logos "harmonies" (synoptics) however will work with any bible, so you can have him compare the TR if you like.
The NET bible note referred above reads:
Some important witnesses, including early Alexandrian and Western MSS (א*,2 B D Θ f13 pc it vgmss Irlat Hiermss), have the additional words οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός (oude ho huios, “nor the son”) here. Although the shorter reading (which lacks this phrase) is suspect in that it seems to soften the prophetic ignorance of Jesus, the final phrase (“except the Father alone”) already implies this. Further, the parallel in Mark 13:32 has οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός, with almost no witnesses lacking the expression. Hence, it is doubtful that the absence of “neither the Son” is due to the scribes. In keeping with Matthew’s general softening of Mark’s harsh statements throughout his Gospel, it is more likely that the absence of “neither the Son” is part of the original text of Matthew, being an intentional change on the part of the author. Further, this shorter reading is supported by the first corrector of א as well as L W f1
Biblical Studies Press. (2006; 2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.I am not convinced to leave it out. The argument about intentionally adding/keeping in versus taking out/not emending the text cuts both ways.
The date of the parousia, then, is unknown not only to men and even angels, but also to the Son. This title for Jesus occurs also in 11:27 (where see discussion); its omission from many MSS and early versions of the text (see RSV mg.) is probably due to doctrinal embarrassment at the attribution of ignorance to Jesus, a feature which is certainly unlikely to have been imported gratuitously into the tradition (and which is in any case undoubtedly part of the original text of Mark 13:32). This is the clearest statement in the New Testament of a limitation of Jesus’ knowledge, and it is perhaps significant that it is expressed in Father/Son language, a relationship which combines the ideas both of intimate unity and of filial dependence.
France, R. T. (1985). Vol. 1: Matthew: An introduction and commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (350–351). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
At the very least I find this stuff fascinating....don't you? [:D]
Robert Pavich
For help go to the Wiki: http://wiki.logos.com/Table_of_Contents__
0 -
NewbieMick! Peace! And Every Blessing!
Thanks for your post. It encourages me to "go back to the drawing-board," and I am grateful to you!
*smile*
Philippians 4: 4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........
0 -
Hi Don,
As you've discovered The NET BIble notes are great for this sort of thing. As you don't have Metzger, let me show you what he says:
The words “neither the Son” are lacking in the majority of the witnesses of Matthew, including the later Byzantine text. On the other hand, the best representatives of the Alexandrian and the Western types of text contain the phrase. The omission of the words because of the doctrinal difficulty they present is more probable than their addition by assimilation to Mk 13:32. Furthermore, the presence of μόνος and the cast of the sentence as a whole (οὐδὲ … οὐδέ … belong together as a parenthesis, for εἰ μὴ ὁ πατὴρ μόνος goes with οὐδεὶς οἶδεν) suggest the originality of the phrase.
Every significant textual variant is rated from A-D by the editors of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (of which Metzger was one). A represents 'certain', B 'almost certain', C 'unsure', and D 'really, really unsure'. This particular phrase is marked as 'B', which means the editors are 'almost certain' the phrase is original - the opposite conclusion to the NET editors!
That's one of the problems with having lots of great resources. If you just read NET, you probably end up agreeing with it. But if you just read Metzger, you'd probably agree with him instead! If you've read both… you'll probably end up being glad you're not a professor of textual criticism!
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
That's one of the problems with having lots of great resources. If you just read NET, you probably end up agreeing with it. But if you just read Metzger, you'd probably agree with him instead! If you've read both… you'll probably end up being glad you're not a professor of textual criticism!
[Y]
0 -
Hi Mark
Mark Barnes said:Every significant textual variant is rated from A-D by the editors of the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (of which Metzger was one). A represents 'certain', B 'almost certain', C 'unsure', and D 'really, really unsure
Just checking something here.
To see these ratings you need the NA27 apparatus and this is only available in Logos with SESB.
Is that correct?
Graham
0 -
Mark Barnes said:
That's one of the problems with having lots of great resources. If you just read NET, you probably end up agreeing with it. But if you just read Metzger, you'd probably agree with him instead! If you've read both… you'll probably end up being glad you're not a professor of textual criticism!
[:D][Y]
Mac Pro (late 2013) OS 12.6.2
0 -
Graham Criddle said:
To see these ratings you need the NA27 apparatus and this is only available in Logos with SESB.
No, they are available in Metzger http://www.logos.com/product/2190/a-textual-commentary-on-the-greek-new-testament
as well as in Omanson's Textual Guide to the Greek NT (which is part of SESB) only afaik
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
NewbieMick said:Graham Criddle said:
To see these ratings you need the NA27 apparatus and this is only available in Logos with SESB.
No, they are available in Metzger http://www.logos.com/product/2190/a-textual-commentary-on-the-greek-new-testament
Metzger is prioritized very high in my library among commentaries. I consult it on pretty much every NT passage I'm studying. However comparing across a few English versions (I use ESV | NASB | NET | HCSB | LEB | NKJV | NIV) will make me aware of most of the translational and textual issues to light well before consulting Metzger or any traditional commentaris.
Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org0 -
Graham Criddle said:
To see these ratings you need the NA27 apparatus and this is only available in Logos with SESB.
Is that correct?
As others have noted, they are provided by Metzger. Surprisingly, they're not included in SESB at all. However, it's also worth adding that Metzer only covers some variants (though all the more important ones).
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0 -
I have no seminary or college background. My only ability to discuss and use original language studies in the SS classroom comes from the tremendous advances great learned men and developers at Logos have made that allows barely high school educated people like me to peek into these wonderful things.
That said, I tried to look at some of the Greek NT's I have. I'm not even sure I'm relaying the titles correctly, but here goes:
Gr. NT 4th Rev. Ed. USB4 = Had οὐδέ ὁ υἱός
SBLGNT = Had οὐδέ ὁ υἱός
Inter. Lit. Trans. = Did not.
LEx. Syn. Gr. NT = Had οὐδέ ὁ υἱός
NA = Had οὐδέ ὁ υἱός
Schrivener 1881 = Did not
Wescott & Hort = Had οὐδέ ὁ υἱός
Bzy = Did not
I really don't know if there is any kind of a pattern to what I wrote above. Even though a lot of the discussion is over my head, I do pick up bits & pieces that will help me now & with things the next time. Even though it makes my head hurt trying to wrap my thoughts around many things, I'm enjoying this very much.
0 -
Don Jenkins said:
I really don't know if there is any kind of a pattern to what I wrote above.
Inter Lit Trans + Scrivener + Byz are representative of the Byzantine or TR tradition; so they exclude the phrase. The others belong to the "Critical Text" tradition; so they include it on the balance of probabilities!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
NewbieMick said:
No, they are available in Metzger http://www.logos.com/product/2190/a-textual-commentary-on-the-greek-new-testament
NewbieMick said:as well as in Omanson's Textual Guide to the Greek NT (which is part of SESB) only afaik
Jacob Hantla said:Metzger is prioritized very high in my library among commentaries. I consult it on pretty much every NT passage I'm studying. However comparing across a few English versions (I use ESV | NASB | NET | HCSB | LEB | NKJV | NIV) will make me aware of most of the translational and textual issues to light well before consulting Metzger or any traditional commentaris.
Mark Barnes said:As others have noted, they are provided by Metzger. Surprisingly, they're not included in SESB at all. However, it's also worth adding that Metzer only covers some variants (though all the more important ones).
Thanks all - appreciate the insights
Graham
0 -
Thanks for this thread. I spent an enjoyable evening last night delving into the Greek Texts and manuscripts of Matt 24:36.
Regarding manuscript evidence:
As a rough rule of thumb most of our earliest English translations were made using the relatively young Greek manuscripts that were available and resulted in an agreed text which came to be called the Textus Receptus.
Older manuscripts were discovered much more recently and lie behind what until recently was the generally agreed (among scholars) Greek text Nestle-Aland (NA27) and United Bible Societies (UBS4).
Most recently the Society of Biblical Literature has produced a new text SBLGNT. At the moment this is the subject of considerable interest/controversy among textual scholars and it remains to be seen how it will play out.
For those who would like to take this further, see:
Bruce M. Metzger, who wrote a book which I used 20+ years ago as an undergraduate studying Textual Criticism: The Text of the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1968)
Kurt and Barbara Aland wrote The Text of the New Testament, Revised and Enlarged (Grand Rapids, 1989; Leiden, 1989)
N.B. Textual Criticism is in many ways more an art than a science, despite what some scholars would argue.
Enjoy. I do.
Every blessing
Alan
iMac Retina 5K, 27": 3.6GHz 8-Core Intel Core i9; 16GB RAM;MacOS 10.15.5; 1TB SSD; Logos 8
MacBook Air 13.3": 1.8GHz; 4GB RAM; MacOS 10.13.6; 256GB SSD; Logos 8
iPad Pro 32GB WiFi iOS 13.5.1
iPhone 8+ 64GB iOS 13.5.1
0
