TCG 2007 by Wieland Willker - Bibleworks module
- With much thanks to Wieland Willker, that allowed its inclusion on
Bibleworks and free distribution,
on Bibleworks forum or in Bibleworks blog there is a link to TCG
2007 - A Critical Textual Commentary on the Gospels by Wieland
Willker devoloped for Bibleworks user (Finalrev1 dated 1 april 2007).
The conversion of the original pdf in a chm module with the
permission of Wieland Willker is by Pasquale.
Mirrored on Bibleworks blog:
PS. If anyone find any mistakes in this electronic Bibleworks edition
please send me a mail. mailto: pasgil@...
- Dear List:
As I was reading through the Gospel of Matthew, I
noticed an interesting variant. It occurs at Matthew
13:44a, which is the Parable of Hidden Treasure. The
variant concerns the inclusion or omission of the
words EN TW AGRW (v. 44a). Anyway, this is what I
1. The variant is not mentioned in the UBS
2. The variant is not mentioned in Nestle Aland
I was reading Sinaiticus at the time, and I just
couldnt help having a look at Vaticanus too. As I
looked at the pages of both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus,
I noticed that the arrangement of words on the pages
was very similar.
1. Both leaves of parchment begin with 13:41
2. Both manuscripts end the explanation of the
Parable of the Wheat and Weeds with the injunction
AKOUETW on one line by itself. The following line
begins the Parable of Hidden Treasure.
With respect to the variant EN TW AGRW, as I compared
the two codices I noticed that Sinaiticus omits the
phrase while Vaticanus includes the phrase. I also
took note of QHSAURW, meaning treasure. I am not
certain about the etymology of QHSAUROS, however the
noun appears to be formed from QHS and AGRA meaning
field or QHS and AURA meaning wind in motion. (If
the former is the case, then the gamma in AGRA has
elided to form the diphthong AU before the rho.) I
only mention this etymological speculation as a means
of forming an hypothesis about what is happening on a
text critical level between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
1. Do the scribes of Vaticanus ADD the words EN TW
AGRW as a type of Midrash on QHSAUROS? (perhaps also
leveling off the actions at v. 44b)
2. Do the scribes of Sinaiticus OMIT the words EN TW
AGRW in part to fulfill the Parable to hide again
what was found?
3. Does Sinaiticus testify that the words EN TW AGRW
are not in the Autograph?
4. Does Vaticanus testify that the EN TW AGRW are in
Any comment are welcome.
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.