This is a verse where your understanding will be connected with your
views of lectio difficilior and your overall view of Aleph and B
the majority Greek Byzantine text. There were two excellent
given to Bryan but I just want to add a bit more.
This is a continuation from September :-) .
Acts 16:7 (KJB)
After they were come to Mysia,
they assayed to go into Bithynia:
but the Spirit suffered them not.
Acts 16:7 (NASV)
and after they came to Mysia,
they were trying to go into Bithynia,
and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them;
Bryan Cox -
Metzger ... states that
the phrase, "the spirit of Jesus", was "so unusual that
various attempts were made to modify it". Thus, some
manuscripts have "the spirit of the Lord" or "the holy
First I would like to note John
http://eword. gospelcom. net/comments/ acts/gill/ acts16.htm
the Alexandrian copy, and Beza's most ancient copy, and some others,
and the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions read, "the
Spirit of Jesus": so that it was not an evil spirit, or Satan, that
hindered them, who sometimes did; but they were under the direction and
guidance of the divine Spirit, called, in the preceding verse, the Holy
I give John Gill to show that textual
theories can go both ways. Gill is not seeing
"Spirit of Jesus" as harder to be smoothed, but more as an
expounding for a
conjectured spiritual 'safety net'. Apparently John Gill is not
taking a textual stance,
the expounding could be either Luke or later copyists.
And note that Jim Snapp in giving his nine reasons, the last four overlap
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/textualcri ticism/message/ 3377
Although Reid Lindner, in his also excellent and related four reasons,
let that idea go by.
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/textualcri ticism/message/ 3376
Both are thanked for truly excellent posts.
...I am curious if anyone knows
of and could share, from a Byzantine/Majority text "supporter"
perspective, any currently existing theories on this particular variant
and how it might have resulted in the other
Note that this part was covered in the posts above. However more can be
A good place to start, as often is the case, is in the Dean's
He is less interested in 'how' one reading goes to another (personally I
theories are often tailored to agenda and convenience, with either side
depending on what is to be demonstrated) but how the longer reading first
-- as part of a pattern of corruptions.
http://books. google.com/ books?id= fX9CAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA288
The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Vindicated & Established
(p. 288) - Dean John Burgon
Burgon calls this WH addition part of the
"skeptical character of B and Aleph"
Mentioning Matthew 3:16 and other verses as similar
corruptions. Keep in mind
that sometimes the B and Aleph readings do not make the modern version
Also this is only one section amidst a fascinating part of the book, with
You would have to do a bit of research on each one to determine your own
of the analogous situations. However for reference I will
give you the KJB/TR
verses, and the Dean note. The Greek is in the page above.
(omission is in itself skeptical)
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the
and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God
descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
(Matthew 1:18 - slurring the divine birth in
Aleph and B)
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:
When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,
before they came together,
she was found with child of the Holy Ghost
(necessity of the Lord to suffer),
And said unto them,
Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer,
and to rise from the dead the third day:
Matthew 19:16-17 - Omission of the title
'good' applied to our Lord
And, behold, one came and said unto
Good Master, what good thing shall I do,
that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him,
Why callest thou me good?
there is none good but one, that is, God:
but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
And the omission of the ending of Mark as
being of a similar nature.
============ ========= ========= ========= ========= =======
There is one other element I would like to share.
Dr. George Milligan in defending the Revision's longer reading
Expository Value Of The Revised Version -
"Acts 16:7... the striking reading, 'the Spirit of Jesus' (not
simply as in the Authorized Version 'the Spirit') implies that the Holy
Spirit had so taken possession of the Person of the Exalted Jesus that He
could be spoken of as 'the Spirit of Jesus.'"
Benjamin Wilkinson, pro-TR
http://kjv.benabrah am.com/html/ chapter-11. html
The evident purpose of this change is to open the way to teach ideas
the Person of Jesus different from the generally accepted Protestant
Benjamin couches this in the context of
Trinitarian orthodoxy, however he
does not discuss the distinction he would have to make with:
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit,
if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ,
he is none of his.
Philippians 1:19 -
For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer,
and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,
or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did
when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ,
and the glory that should follow.
So for now I would put limited capital into
the Wilkinson explanation,
while allowing for a more complete exposition.
============ ========= ========= ==
EARLY CHURCH WRITERS
I think it would be an interesting endeavor to find most of the early
church writer references.
A lot of times the references tell you much more than the
citations. And I think sometimes
the apparatus "double-dips" Jerome, by giving him the Vulgate
reading, rather than his own
specific writing. Granted, this was likely an early text-line
split. From Münster :
Origenlat Didymusdub Jerome Cyril
Ephraem Epiphanius Chrysostom (Ambrosiaster)