Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.

html

Bible Research > Textual Criticism > Bibliography > E

Ehrman, 1993. Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The

Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New
Testament. London: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Ehrman's book is an interesting study in the theological motives which may

have given rise to some textual variants in the New Testament. Ehrman's
arguments involve a good bit of speculation, though, and he sometimes
makes use of "higher" criticism of the canonical books. The important
distinction between scientifically rigorous lower criticism, on the one hand,
and purely speculative higher criticism on the other, ought to be
maintained more carefully by an author who wants to be taken seriously by
conservatives.

Ehrman and Holmes, 1995. Bart D. Ehrman and Michael W. Holmes, editors,
The Text of the New Testament in Contemporary Research: Essays on the
"Status Quaestionis." Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Includes essays reviewing recent developments in every department of

textual criticism.

Ellicott et al., 1881. C.J. Ellicott, et al., The New Testament of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, Translated out of the Greek: Being the Version Set Forth
A.D. 1611, Compared with the Most Ancient Authorities and Revised, A.D.
1881. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1881.

The New Testament version commonly called the "Revised Version" (RV) or
the "English Revised Version" (ERV) of 1881, of which the American
Standard Version was an American edition. This version is a revision of the
King James version made on the basis of Westcott and Hort 1881 and
Tregelles 1857. The readings adopted by the committee of revisers were
presented in a continuous Greek text in Palmer 1881, which includes
marginal notes showing every departure from the Greek text presumed to
underlie the King James version (for which see Scrivener 1881).

For a convenient comparison of the ERV with the KJV, see Geoffrey
Cumberlege, ed., The Interlinear Bible: The Authorised Version and the
Revised Version, Together with the Marginal Notes of Both Versions and
Central References (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1906). For
philological commentary on the ERV see Frederick Field, Notes on the
Translation of the New Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1899). For criticism of the underlying Greek text see Burgon 1883 and

1 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

Whitney 1892.

Elliott et al., 1984. G.G. Willis, J.N. Birdsall, J.K. Elliott, et al. (American
and British Committees of the International Greek New Testament Project),
The New Testament in Greek: The Gospel According to St. Luke: Part One:
Chapters 1-12. Part Two: Chapters 13-24. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984,
1987.

The International Greek New Testament Project, a cooperative undertaking

of British and American scholars, began work on a comprehensive critical
apparatus of various readings in 1948, and after forty years we have the
fruit of their labors in these two volumes of Luke's gospel. Work is now
proceeding on the gospel of John. The two volumes published so far are
without a doubt the most detailed and wide-ranging collection of variants
ever published for Luke. The collation base is the 1873 Oxford reprint of
Lloyd 1828.

Elliott, 1989. J.K. Elliott, A Bibliography of Greek New Testament

Manuscripts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Elliott's bibliography is a complete guide to published manuscripts,

collations, facsimiles, and photographic plates.

Elzevir, 1624. [Isaac Elzevir], Novum Testamentum Græce. Lugduni

Batavorum [Leiden]: Ex officina Elzeviriana, 1624; 2nd edition 1633.

The Elzevir text is practically a reprint of the text of Beza 1565 with about
fifty minor differences in all. The Elzevirs were notable printers, and their
editions of the Greek New Testament were accurate and elegant.
Throughout Europe the Elzevir editions came to occupy a place of honor,
and their text was employed as the standard one for commentary and
collation. The Elzevir editions are collated against Estienne 1550 in the
appendix of Tregelles 1854, and in Newberry 1877, Scrivener 1861, and
Hoskier 1890.

The following information on the Elzevir editions is given by Dr. Ronald D.

Minton of Piedmont Baptist College in his book, The Making and
Preservation of the Bible.

"The Elzevirs [also spelled Elzevier and Elsevier] were a family of

well-known Dutch printers and publishers. They were of Flemish
ancestry and were famous printers for several generations....

"Bonaventure and his nephew, Abraham, are famous for

publishing the Greek New Testament. However, it was Abraham's
brother Isaac that actually printed the first Elzevir Greek New
Testament in 1624. This edition was small and convenient. It had
all verse numbers on the inside margin of each page. After that

2 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

printing sold out, Bonaventure and Abraham themselves printed

the second Elzevir edition in 1633. The preface of this second
edition was written by Daniel Heinsius (1580-1655) and the editor
was Jeremias Hoelzlin (1583-1644). [This has been rarely
mentioned, and was uncertain until the publication of H.J. de
Jonge, "Jeremias Hoelzlin: Editor of the 'Textus Receptus' Printed
by the Elzevirs Leiden 1633," in T. Baarda, A.F.J. Klijn, and W.C.
VanUnnik, eds. Miscellanea Neotestamentica 1 (1978): 105-28.
Heinsius and Hoelzlin were both professors at Leiden.] It had all
the verse numbers to the left of the text and within the text
itself. Each verse was started separately and the first letter was
capitalized. The text of this 1633 edition became known as the
"Textus Receptus" because of an advertisement in Heinsius'
preface that said in Latin Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus
receptum: in quo nihil immutatum aut corruptum damus,
'Therefore you have the text now received by all in which we
give nothing altered or corrupt.' ...

"On the Elzevirs' family and their publishing and printing history,
see Alphonse Willems, Les Elzevier, Histoire et Annales
Typographiques (Brussels-Paris-The Hague: Van Trigt, 1880; 2nd
reprint Nieuwkoop: B. de Graaf, 1974); H.B. Copinger, The
Elzevir Press (n.p. 1927); D.W. Davies, The World of the
Elzevirs, 1580- 1712 (The Hague, 1954); P.R. Sellin, Daniel
Heinsius and Stuart England (London: Oxford University Press,
1968)."

Elzevir, 1633. [Jeremias Hoelzlin, ed.], Novum Testamentum Græce. Lugduni

Batavorum [Leiden]: Ex officina Elzeviriana, 1633.

This second Elzevir edition differs little from the first (see Elzevir 1624),
and is collated against it in Hoskier 1890.

Epp and Fee, 1981. Eldon Jay Epp and Gordon Fee, eds., New Testament
Textual Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis. London: Oxford University
Press, 1981.

Epp, 1989. Eldon Jay Epp, The New Testament and its Modern Interpreters.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989.

The fourth chapter of this book ("Textual Criticism") is followed by an

extensive bibliography (pages 106-126).

Epp and Fee, 1993. Eldon Jay Epp and Gordon D. Fee, Studies in the Theory
and Method of New Testament Textual Criticism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1993.

This volume is a collection of articles published in scholarly journals over

3 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

the past twenty-five years. Epp and Fee are critical of the genealogical
theories of Westcott & Hort, and emphasize the need for new and more
adequate theories. They point out the weaknesses of the largely intuitive
"eclectic" method practiced by most editors today, in which basic
theoretical issues are ignored. Kurt Aland (see Aland et al. 1979) is
severely criticized for his neglect of theory in two of the articles.

Erasmus, 1516. Desiderius Erasmus, Novum Instrumentu omne, diligenter ad

Erasmo Roterodamo recognitum et emendatum, non solum ad graecam
veritatem, verum etiam ad multorum utriusque linguae codicum, eorumque
veterum simul et emendatorum fidem, postremo adprobatissimorum autorum
citationem, emendationem, et interpretationem, praecipue, Origenis,
Chrysostomi, Cyrilli, Vulgarii, Hieronymi, Cypriani, Ambrosii, Hilarii,
Augustini, una cum Annotationibus, quae lectorem doceant, quid qua ratione
mutatum sit. Quisquis igitur amas veram theologiam, lege, cognosce, ac
diende judica. Neque statim offendere, si quid mutatum offenderis, sed
expende, num in melius mutatum sit. Apud inclytam Germaniae Basilaeam
[The entire New Testament, diligently researched and corrected by Erasmus
of Rotterdam, &c]. Basel: Johann Froben, 1516; 2nd ed. 1519; 3rd ed. 1522;
4th ed. 1527; 5th ed. 1535.

Desiderius Erasmus, born 1466 in the Dutch town of Gouda, was the second
illegitimate son of a local Priest. He took monastic vows at the age of 21,
and was himself ordained a Priest at the age of 26. A largely self-taught
classical scholar, he began to take an interest in the Greek New Testament
around the age of 34, and at the age of 39 published an edition of Valla's
Annotations on the New Testament. In 1511, at the age of 45, he published
a satirical work called Moriae encomium, "Praise of Folly," in which he
ridiculed the hypocritical churchmen of his day. His first edition of the
Greek New Testament appeared in 1516, when he was 50 years old. The
Reformation broke out in Germany five years later, and many expected him
to join the Protestants; but he did not share their theological convictions,
and preferred to remain safely in the church of Rome. He died in 1536, at
the age of 70.

Sources: Erasmus' Greek text was based upon three of the cursive
manuscripts readily available to him in Basle. They are (as designated by
the notation of Scrivener and Miller 1894): Evan. 2 (15th cent.); Act.Paul.
2 (13th to 14th cent.); and Apoc. 1 (12th cent.). He sometimes adopted
readings found in three other cursives also at Basle: Evan.Act.Paul. 1 (10th
to 13th cent.); Act.Paul. 4 (15th cent.); and Paul. 7 (date undetermined).
For his second edition (1519) he evidently consulted the cursive
Evan.Act.Paul. 3 (12th century). He also made much use of his notes on
various readings of the Latin Vulgate, of Patristic quotations, and of other
(unspecified) Greek copies he had met with over the years, which he had
compiled in preparation for his revision of the Latin Vulgate. The cursive
manuscript Apoc. 1, his only Greek source for the book of Revelation, was

4 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

scarcely legible in places, and it lacked the final leaf containing the last
six verses of the book.

Method: Erasmus himself later said that the Greek text of his first edition
was "not edited, but done headlong;" that is, thrown together hastily. His
publisher, John Froben, desired to get the edition out on the market
quickly, and so Erasmus obtained what manuscripts he could find on short
notice, marked on them a few changes, and gave them as copy to the
printer. Most of the changes were made in order to present a text which
displayed the Greek readings he had followed in his Latin translation, which
he had been preparing for some time, and which appeared alongside the
Greek in this edition. These readings were already supported by unspecified
Greek manuscripts and other sources mentioned in the appended
Annotations. The Annotations show that quotations from the early Latin
ecclesiastical writers (called Fathers) were often decisive in his choice of
readings, despite lack of support in Greek copies. For example, Acts 8:37
(And Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And
he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God) has
almost no Greek manuscript support, but Erasmus inserted it because it
was in the Vulgate, with some support from the Fathers, and in the margin
of one of his copies. In Acts 9:5-6, the words it is hard for thee to kick
against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt
thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him are imported from Acts
26:14 and 22:10, and appear in no Greek copy at all here, although they
are represented in the Vulgate, with some support from the Fathers. On
the other hand, Erasmus rejected the testimony of the Vulgate in a very
important doctrinal passage: in 1 John 5:7-8 the words in heaven, the
Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there
are three that bear witness in earth, which express the doctrine of the
Trinity more clearly than any in Scripture, are omitted in Erasmus' first two
editions. In the book of Revelation he frankly resorted to conjecture in
places, supplying Greek words by translation from Latin sources. Some of
these factitious readings passed into the later texts of Estienne, Elzevir,
and Beza, and are represented in the King James version, e.g., Rev 17:4
filthiness instead of unclean things; Rev 22:18 For at the beginning of the
verse, and in the same verse add unto these things instead of add unto
them; Rev 22:21 our added before Lord. As may be seen from the
examples, however, the degree of corruption introduced by this expedient
is very slight.

Format of the first edition: Publisher's Preface (one page); Dedication to

Pope Leo X by Erasmus (three pages); Introduction (23 pages); parallel
Greek text and Latin version without marginal notes (548 pages); lengthy
appendix of annotations (401 pages).

Reprints and editions: Erasmus' first edition (1516) has recently been
reprinted in a photographic facsimile: Erasmus von Rotterdam: Novum

5 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

Instrumentum, Basel 1516: Faksimile - Neudruck mit einer historischen,

textkritischen und bibliographischen Einleitung von Heinz Holeczek
(Stuttgart and Bad Canstatt: Frommann and Holzboog, 1986). His second
edition (1519) differed from the first chiefly in the correction of numerous
errors of the press, and in the addition of more notes. In his third edition
(1522) Erasmus inserted the so-called Comma Johanneum in 1 John 5:7,
not because he believed it to be authentic, but in order to "take away the
handle for calumniating him which had been afforded by his honestly
following his MSS. in this passage" (Tregelles, Account of the Printed Text,
p. 26. For a full discussion of the pressure Erasmus was under to insert the
Comma against his better judgment see H.J. de Jonge, 'Erasmus and the
Comma Johanneum,' Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 56 [1980], pp.
381-389.). The fourth edition of 1527 gave a generally improved text, in
which Erasmus adopted many readings of the Complutensian Polyglot (see
Stunica 1522) for the book of Revelation, and also included a third column
giving the traditional text of the Vulgate beside his own Latin version. The
fifth edition of 1535 differed very little from the fourth, except that the
Vulgate has been left out, reducing the size of the volume.

Reception: The first two editions quickly sold out (Erasmus states in a
letter that these amounted to 3300 copies). James Lopez de Stunica, the
editor of the forthcoming Complutensian Polyglot, criticized Erasmus' text
for various faults, and for the omission of the clause in 1 John 5:7-8. The
influential scholars of France followed Stunica in denouncing the edition,
although most of their criticism was directed not against the Greek text,
but against the innovative Latin translation. Elsewhere it was received
more favorably. A letter of thanks was sent to Erasmus from Pope Leo X, to
whom the first edition was dedicated.

Influence: The second edition (1519) was followed by Martin Luther in his
German translation (1522). The third edition (1522) was used by William
Tyndale in his English translation (see Tyndale 1526). The text of the fourth
and fifth edition (1527, 1535) was closely followed by Robert Estienne in
his influential third edition (1550), which in turn provided the basis for all
editions later published by Beza (1565-98), subsequently followed by the
translators of the King James version. The editions of Elzevir (1624, 1633)
also derived from Erasmus 1527, as mediated by Estienne and Beza.
Erasmus' text therefore became the foundation for nearly all editions and
translations of the Greek text published for two centuries afterwards.

Secondary Literature: J.A. Froude, Life and Letters of Erasmus (New York,
1896). Jerry H. Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ: New Testament
Scholarship in the Renaissance (Princeton, 1983). Erika Rummel, Erasmus'
Annotations on the New Testament: from Philologist to Theologian
(Toronto, 1986). Heinz Holeczek, "Einleitung," in Erasmus von Rotterdam:
Novum Instrumentum, Basel 1516: Faksimile - Neudruck mit einer
historischen, textkritischen und bibliographischen Einleitung von Heinz

6 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

Holeczek (Stuttgart and Bad Canstatt: Frommann and Holzboog, 1986);

Roland H. Bainton, Erasmus of Christendom. (New York: Scribner, 1969);
Robert D. Sider, ed., Erasmus’ Annotations on Romans. Translated and
annotated by John Barton Payne. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,
1994).

Erasmus, 1519. Desiderius Erasmus, Novum Testamentum. 2nd edition. See

Erasmus 1516.

Erasmus, 1522. Desiderius Erasmus, Novum Testamentum. 3rd edition. See

Erasmus 1516.

Erasmus, 1527. Desiderius Erasmus, Novum Testamentum. 4th edition. See

Erasmus 1516.

Erasmus, 1535. Desiderius Erasmus, Novum Testamentum. 5th edition. See

Erasmus 1516.

Estienne, 1546. Robert Estienne, Novum Testamentum Græce. Lutetiæ: ex

officiana Roberti Stephani Typographi, Typis Regiis. 1546; 2nd ed. 1549; 3rd
ed. 1550; 4th ed. Geneva 1551.

The renowned French printer Robert Estienne, called Stephens in England,

gave in his first two editions (1546, 1549) a text which for the most part
followed Erasmus' fourth edition (1527), but with many departures from it
according to the Complutensian edition (see Stunica 1522). In his preface
to the first two editions he does not mention Erasmus, and instead refers
vaguely to certain manuscripts he had examined in the King's library, and to
the Complutensian edition, as his sources.

In his third edition (1550) he adhered more closely to Erasmus in the text
(still without notice), and presented the various readings of the
Complutensian in the margin, along with a selection of readings of the
manuscripts referred to earlier. One of them was from Italy, he says, eight
from the Royal Library, and six from private libraries; but he did not
identify them in such a way that they could be found and consulted again
by others. Although Estienne professed to have collated them himself, it is
now known that this was done by his son Henry, who in his collation (which
is very defective) indicated them separately by various letters of the Greek
alphabet which he had assigned to them. Some of these have since been
identified by scholars: they are mostly of the ordinary modern type, such
as were easily available in Paris, with one notable exception; It appears
that one of Estienne's manuscripts (the one he says came from Italy) was
the Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis, a peculiar old manuscript which later
became rather important in textual criticism. This collection of various
readings in the margin distinguished Estienne's third edition as the first
Greek text with a critical apparatus, and greatly enhanced the reputation
of the text. It was thought by many that Estienne had edited his text

7 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24
Bibliography of Textual Criticism "E" http://www.bible-researcher.com/bib-e.html

directly from these manuscripts, and indeed Estienne's preface promotes

this idea. But in more than a hundred places all of Estienne's manuscripts
are cited together for readings which differ from the text, and in several
places the text follows Erasmus alone against all known manuscripts. It
may also be observed that in the one place above all others where the
various readings were likely to be consulted, that is, in 1 John 5:7, an error
in the placement of brackets led readers to believe that all seven of the
manuscripts collated by Estienne for the General Epistles included most of
the disputed clause relative to the three heavenly witnesses, when in fact
none of them contained the clause at all.

The fourth edition (1551) presented the text of the third edition in
numbered verses. Estienne numbered the verses with the idea of providing
a Greek concordance, which, however, he did not live to publish. (Robert
Estienne died in 1559. It was not until 1594 that the Concordantiae
Graecae Novi Testamenti was finally published in Geneva by his son Henry,
although poorly edited). His verse numbers were adopted in all subsequent
editions and translations.

The text of Estienne's third and fourth edition (1550, 1551) was used by
William Whittingham and his colleagues as the basis for the English version
of the New Testament included in the Geneva Bible, which was the most
widely used English translation prior to the appearance of the King James
version (1611). Theodore Beza also used the text of Estienne 1550-51 as
the basis for his own influential editions (see Beza 1565), and it generally
came to be regarded as a standard text, especially in England. It became
the most commonly used text for the purpose of manuscript collation and
exegetical commentary, and has been reprinted hundreds of times in
various forms, up to the present day (see Newberry 1877, Berry 1897,
Scrivener and Nestle 1906). Literal translations are given in Newberry
1877, Berry 1897, and Young's Literal Translation.

For a biography of Estienne, see Elizabeth Armstrong, Robert Estienne,

Royal Printer: an Historical Study of the Elder Stephanus (Cambridge,
1954).

Estienne, 1549. Robert Estienne, Novum Testamentum Græce. 2nd edition.

Paris, 1549. See Estienne 1546.

Estienne, 1550. Robert Estienne, Novum Testamentum Græce. 3rd edition.

Paris, 1550. See Estienne 1546.

Estienne, 1551. Robert Estienne, Novum Testamentum Græce. 4th edition.

Geneva, 1551. See Estienne 1546.

Bible Research > Textual Criticism > Bibliography > E

8 de 8 08/11/2014 20:24