Acts 19:16

auton (them) - H, L, P, S, Y, Byz, syrs

amfoteron (both of them) - P, Aleph, A, B, D, 33, syrp, cop

Problem: The sons of Sceva were seven, not two.

Discussion: To argue that "both" can mean "all" on the basis of this passage is to beg the question. An appeal to Acts 23:8 is likewise unconvincing. "For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection - and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both. "Angel" and "spirit", if not intended as synonyms, at least belong to a single class, spirit beings. However, the Pharisees believed in "both" - the resurrection and spirit beings. There is no basis here for claiming that "both" can legitimately refer to seven (Acts 19:16).1 Yet, most modern versions do render "both" as "all". The NASV actually renders "both of them," making the contradiction overt!

 Matthew 1:7-8

Asa (Asa) - E, K, L, M, S, U, V, W, G, D, P, S, W, 33, Byz, Lect, latpt, syr

Asaph (Asaph) - Aleph, B, C, f1,13, latpt, cop

Problem: Asaph does not belong in Jesus' genealogy.

Discussion: Asaph was a Levite, not of the tribe of Judah; he was a psalmist, not a king. It is clear from Metzger's comments that the UBS editors understand that their reading refers to the Levite (p.1).

In fact, "Asaph" is probably not a misspelling of "Asa". Not counting Asa and Amon (see v.10), Codex B misspells 13 names in this chapter; Codex A misspells 10. These misspellings involve dittography, gender change, or a similar sound ("z" for "s", "d" for "t", "m" for "n"). They are not harmless misspellings such as adding an extraneous consonant, like "f", or trading dissimilar sounds, like "s" for "n".

In response to Lagrange, who considered "Asaph" to be an ancient scribal error, Metzger writes: "Since, however, the evangelist may have derived material for the genealogy, not from the Old Testament directly, but from subsequent genealogical lists, in which the erroneous spelling occurred, the Committee saw no reason to adopt what appears to be a scribal emendation" (p.1).

Thus Metzger frankly declares that the spelling they have adopted is "erroneous". The UBS editors have deliberately imported an error into their text, which is faithfully reproduced by NAB (New American Bible). RSV and NASB add a footnote stating that the Greek reads "Asaph". It would be less misleading had they said that a tiny fraction of the Greek MSS so read. The case of Amon vs. Amos in verse 10 is analogous to this.

1 Metzger's discussion is interesting: "The difficulty of reconciling [seven] with [both], however, is not so great as to render the text which includes both an impossible text. On the other hand, however, the difficulty is so troublesome that it is hard to explain how [seven] came into the text, and was perpetuated, if it were not original, ..." (pp. 471-472). Note that Metzger assumes the genuineness of "both" and discusses the difficulty that it creates as if it were fact. His assumption is baseless and the difficulty it creates is the result of his presuppositions.

153


continued...