ACTS 10:3 peri, The Textus Receptus, following L P Y and most minuscules, omits peri,. The word, which apparently was dropped by copyists who deemed it superfluous, is decisively supported by î74 a A B C E 36a 642 808 _al_.... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:5 tina, {B} The presence of tina, after Si,mwna is altogether appropriate in the mouth of Cornelius, to whom Peter was unknown. On the other hand, however, the expression “a certain Simon who is called Peter” may have seemed to copyists to lack proper respect for the chief of the apostles,... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:6 At the close of the verse several minuscules (321 322 436 453 466 467) add from Acts 11:14 the words o]j lalh,sei r`h,mata pro,j se( evn oi-j swqh,sh| su. kai. pa/j o` oi=ko,j sou. A similar phrase, ou-toj lalh,sei soi ti, se dei/ poiei/n, which is found in 69mg 1611 and in several Latin... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:9 e[kthn Instead of “sixth” hour ac 225 _al_ read “ninth” (evna,thn), making Peter’s prayer coincide with Cornelius’s prayer (ver. Acts 10:30).... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:10 evge,neto (2) Instead of the second instance of evge,neto, the later text (E L P many minuscules, followed by the Textus Receptus) substitutes evpe,pesen, which not only avoids the repetition of evge,neto but provides a more appropriate word with e;kstasij.... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:11 kai. katabai/non skeu/o,j ti w`j ovqo,nhn mega,lhn te,ssarsin avrcai/j kaqie,menon {C} Apparently the Western text lacked katabai/non (it is omitted by itd syrp, h copsa Didascalia [in Apostolic Constitutions]) and described the vessel as “tied (dedeme,non) at (the) four corners.” In th... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:12 tetra,poda kai. e`rpeta. th/j gh/j {B} Copyists recollecting the similar but fuller account in Acts 11:6 produced a variety of expanded readings; thus, the usual expression $kai.% ta. qhri,a was introduced before or after ta. e`rpeta,, or after th/j gh/j. The reading that best explains... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:16 euvqu.j avnelh,mfqh {B} The readings with pa,lin before or after avnelh,mfqh reflect scribal assimilation to the parallel account in Acts 11:10. Of the other readings, a majority of the Committee preferred euvqu.j avnelh,mfqh, which is well supported by î74 a A B C Egr 81 88 1877 vg syr... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:17 ivdou, The Textus Receptus, following C D E L P and most minuscules, reads kai. ivdou,. A majority of the Committee, impressed by the weight of î45, 74 a A B 81 181 242 255 429 _al,_ preferred the reading ivdou, without kai, [The probability that modification would have gone from the m... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:19 @auvtw|/# The omission of auvtw|/ (in B) appears to be accidental, yet because of the variation in position of the pronoun in the other readings, it was thought best to represent the possibility that the shorter text was original and to enclose auvtw|/ within square brackets. Of the two... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:21-23 The Western text differs in several minor details. In ver. Acts 10:21 instead of kataba.j de, D E syrp read to,te kataba,j, and before ti,j D syrh add the solemn but superfluous ti, qe,lete h; (by itacism D reads qe,letai). In ver. Acts 10:22 D syrp copsa add pro.j auvto,n after ei=pa... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:24 eivsh/lqen {C} Although eivsh/lqon may have been altered to the singular number in order to agree with evxh/lqen in the previous verse, a majority of the Committee judged that transcriptional probability favors eivsh/lqen, since it is preceded and followed by plurals (sunh/lqon and auvt... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:25 The expansion in the Western text of this verse appears to have arisen from reflecting upon the difficulty involved in the ordinary text, that Cornelius could not have known exactly when to go out to meet Peter and to summon his kinsmen and close friends to his home. The text of D, suppo... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:26-29 Instead of avna,sthqi in ver. Acts 10:26 D reads ti, poiei/j* (compare Acts 7:26 ti, poiei/te* D, and Acts 14:15); both expressions are conflated in itp syrhmg, and itp2 adds _deum adora_ (compare tw|/ qew|/ prosku,nhson, Revelation 19:10... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:30 th.n evna,thn {B} The Textus Receptus, supported by a diversified and respectable array of witnesses, appears to be clear and straightforward: VApo. teta,rthj h`me,raj me,cri tau,thj th/j w[raj h;mhn nhsteu,wn( kai. th.n evna,thn w[ran proseuco,menoj evn tw|/ oi;kw| mou, which ought to m... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:32 qa,lassan {B} The concluding clause, o]j parageno,menoj lalh,sei soi (translated in the AV “Who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee”), appears to be an innocuous expansion in the Western text (D E itd, e, gig, 63, 67 syrmsK) that was later incorporated into the Byzantine text (H L P m... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:33 The Western text modifies the verse in several respects: “So I sent to you at once, _asking you to come to us_ (parakalw/n evlqei/n se [D* omits se] pro.j h`ma/j, D itp vgms syrh, msK copG67), and you have been kind enough to come _quickly_ (evn ta,cei D). Now _behold_ (ivdou, D syrh ins... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:36-38 In several respects the Greek of the Alexandrian text is harsh: (1) both sentences lack connecting particles; (2) avrxa,menoj cannot be syntactically construed; and (3) the abrupt apposition of VIhsou/n to.n avpo. Nazare,q to r`h/ma is far from idiomatic. Besides several scribal effor... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:36 @o[n# {C} Either the addition or the omission of o[n can be defended on palaeographical grounds (dittography or haplography with the preceding &on). Of the two readings the one with the relative pronoun is the more difficult. According to Torrey, the un-Greek suspended construction of t... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:37 avrxa,menoj {B} The use of the pendent nominative, avrxa,menoj (î74 a A B C D E H 1739 _al_), which is to be taken in a quasi-adverbial sense, can be paralleled not only in Greek inscriptions and papyri 201 but also in Xenophon and Plutarch 202; one is therefore not compelled to resort,... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:40 @evn# th|/ tri,th| h`me,ra| {C} The reading meta. th.n tri,thn h`me,ran (D* itd, l, t) may be either an attempt to harmonize the expression with that of Matthew 27:63, etc., or, as Harris argues, may be an idiosyncrasy of codex Bezae (as also in Matthew 16:21; Matthew 17:23) that reflec... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:41 Toward the end of the verse several Western witnesses (with minor variations) make two additions to the usual text: “who ate and drank with him _and accompanied (him),_ after he rose from the dead, _for forty days_” (after auvtw|/ D2 itgig, p syrh add kai. sunanestra,fhmen [D reads sunes... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:42 ou-toj Instead of ou-toj (B C Dgr Egr 33 94 103 104 307 323 489 614 623 913 1739 1765 1827 1838 1891 syrp, h copsa, bo _al_) the Textus Receptus, following î74 a A H P 69 81 ite vg eth _al,_ reads auvto,j. A majority of the Committee was impressed not only by the weight of the witnesses... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:46 glw,ssaij Several Western witnesses qualify “tongues” with one or another adjective; thus itd (Dgr has an erasure at this point) reads _praevaricatis linguis,_ which may presuppose an original Greek reading poiki,laij (Hilgenfeld), or kainai/j (Blass), or e`te,raij (Ropes and A. C. Clar... [ Continue Reading ]
ACTS 10:48 auvtou,j Since prosta,ssein is usually construed with the dative of the person commanded and the accusative of the thing commanded, it is probable that auvtoi/j (î74 a A 33 _al_) is a learned correction introduced by those who did not perceive that auvtou,j serves as the subject of the... [ Continue Reading ]