The New Vulgate and the "Missing" Verses: Do All Changes Lead to Rome?
The Greek text of the United Bible Societies (UBS) is characterised by a preference for shorter readings. Consequently, the UBS text omits verses and words that have been included in the Greek Textus Receptus, as well as the Latin Vulgate. From a comparison between the received text, the Clementine...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
NTWSA
[2018]
|
| In: |
Neotestamentica
Year: 2018, Volume: 52, Issue: 2, Pages: 433-470 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Bible (Vulgata)
/ Nova Vulgata
/ United Bible Societies
/ Textual criticism
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The Greek text of the United Bible Societies (UBS) is characterised by a preference for shorter readings. Consequently, the UBS text omits verses and words that have been included in the Greek Textus Receptus, as well as the Latin Vulgate. From a comparison between the received text, the Clementine Vulgate, UBS5 and the Nova Vulgata, this article identifies the main quantitative differences in the textual traditions of the New Testament. This comparison dispels claims that the UBS text favours readings of the Clementine Vulgate and indicates that the UBS text, followed by the Nova Vulgata, is in fact a departure from the Clementine Vulgate as far as its omissions are concerned. On the other hand, differences between the Vulgate and the Textus Receptus on the "missing" verses are shown to be trivial in comparison with the UBS text and Nova Vulgata. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2518-4628 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Neotestamentica
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1353/neo.2018.0024 |