It is clear that the Holy Spirit guided the Church in the gradual establishment of the composition of the canon, so that the Church introduced into it truly apostolic works, which in their existence were caused by the most essential needs of the Church. You can read about it in the first part here.
Throughout the Roman Empire during the time of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles, the dominant language was Greek: it was understood everywhere, almost everywhere in it and spoken. It is clear that the writings of the New Testament, which were intended by the Providence of God to be distributed to all churches, also appeared in Greek, although almost all of them, with the exception of St. Luke, there were Jews. This is evidenced by some internal signs of these scriptures: a play on words, possible only in the Greek language, a free, independent attitude towards the LXX, when the Old Testament passages are cited - all this undoubtedly indicates that they are written in Greek and are intended for readers. who know the Greek language.
However, the Greek language in which the books of the New Testament are written is not the classical Greek language in which the natural Greek writers of the heyday of Greek literature wrote. This is the so-called κοινή διάλεκτος, that is, close to the ancient Attic dialect, but not too different from other dialects. In addition, it includes many Arameisms and other foreign words. Finally, special New Testament concepts were introduced into this language, for the expression of which, however, they used old Greek words, which acquired through this special new meaning (for example, the word χάρις "pleasantness" in the sacred New Testament language began to mean "grace"). For more details, see the article by prof. SI Sobolevsky Κοινή διάλεκτος, placed in the Prav.-Bogosl. Encyclopedias, vol. 10.
New Testament text
The originals of the New Testament books have all perished, but copies have long been removed from them (ἀντίγραφα). Most often the Gospels were written off and less often the Apocalypse. They wrote in reed (κάλαμος) and ink (μέλαν) and more - in the first centuries - on papyrus, so that the right side of each papyrus sheet was glued to the left side of the next sheet. Hence, a strip of greater or lesser length was obtained, which was then rolled onto a rolling pin. This is how a scroll (τόμος) appeared, which was kept in a special box (φαινόλης). Since reading these strips, written only from the front, was inconvenient and the material was fragile, from the 3rd century they began to rewrite the New Testament books on leather or parchment. Since parchment was expensive, many used the old manuscripts on parchment that they had,erasing and scraping what was written on them and placing some other work here. This is how palimpsests were formed. Paper came into use only in the 8th century.
The words in the manuscripts of the New Testament were written without stress, without breathing, without punctuation, and, moreover, with abbreviations (for example, IC instead of Ἰησοῦς, ΠΝΑ instead of πνεῦμα), so these manuscripts were very difficult to read. In the first six centuries, only uppercase letters were used (uncial manuscripts from "ounce" - inch). From the 7th, and some say from the 9th century, manuscripts of ordinary cursive writing appeared. Then the letters decreased, but contractions became more frequent. On the other hand, stress and breathing were added. There are 130 first manuscripts, and the last (according to von Soden's account) - 3700. In addition, there are the so-called lectionaries, containing either the Gospel or the Apostolic readings for use in worship (evangelicals and praxapostles). There are about 1300 of them and the oldest of them date back to the 6th century.
Promotional video:
In addition to the text, the manuscripts usually contain introductions and afterwords with indications of the writer, the time and place of writing the book. To familiarize yourself with the contents of the book in manuscripts divided into chapters (κεφάλαια), the designation of the contents of each chapter is placed before these chapters (τίτλα, argumenta). The chapters are divided into parts (ὑποδιαιρέσεις) or sections, and these latter into verses (κῶλα, στιχοι). The size of the book and its sale price were determined by the number of verses. This processing of the text is usually attributed to Bishop Euphalius of Sardin (7th century), but, in fact, all these divisions took place much earlier. For interpretative purposes Ammonius (in the 3rd century) added parallel passages from other Gospels to the text of the Gospel of Matthew. Eusebius of Caesarea (in the 4th century) compiled ten canons or parallel tables,on the first of which were placed the designations of the sections from the Gospel, common to all four evangelists, on the second - designations (by numbers) - common to three, etc. until the tenth, which indicated stories contained only by one evangelist. In the text of the Gospel, it was marked with a red number, to which canon this or that section belongs. Our present division of the text into chapters was done first by the Englishman Stephen Langton (in the 13th century), and the division into verses by Robert Stephen (in the 16th century). Our present division of the text into chapters was done first by the Englishman Stephen Langton (in the 13th century), and the division into verses by Robert Stephen (in the 16th century). Our present division of the text into chapters was done first by the Englishman Stephen Langton (in the 13th century), and the division into verses by Robert Stephen (in the 16th century).
From the 18th century. uncial manuscripts began to be designated by capital letters of the Latin alphabet, and italics - by numbers. The most important uncial manuscripts are as follows:
K - Codex Sinai, found by Tischendorf in 1856 in the Sinai monastery of St. Catherine. It contains the entire New Testament, together with the epistle of Barnabas and a significant part of Hermas, the Shepherd, as well as the canons of Eusebius. It shows the proofs of seven different hands. It was written in the 4th or 5th century. Stored in Petersburg. Publ. Bibl. Photographs were taken from it.
A - Alexandria, located in London. Here the New Testament is placed not in full, together with the 1st and part of the 2nd Epistle of Clement of Rome. Written in the 5th century. in Egypt or Palestine.
B - Vatican, concluding with the 14th verse of the 9th chapter of Hebrews. It was probably written by someone who was close to Athanasius Alex. in the 4th c. Stored in Rome.
S - Efremov. This is a palimpsest, so named because the treatise of Ephraim the Syrian was subsequently written on the biblical text. It contains only portions of the New Testament. Its origin is Egyptian, it belongs to the 5th century. Stored in Paris.
A list of other manuscripts of later origin can be seen in the 8th edition of the Tischendorf New Testament.
Translations and quotes
Together with the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament as sources for establishing the text of the New Testament, the translations of St. books of the New Testament, which began to appear already in the 2nd century. The first place between them belongs to the Syrian translations, both in their antiquity and in their language, which approaches the Aramaic dialect spoken by Christ and the apostles. The Diatessaron (4 Gospels) of Tatian (c. 175) is believed to be the first Syrian translation of the New Testament. Then comes the Syrian-Sinai (SS) Code, discovered in 1892 in Sinai by Mrs. A. Lewis. Also important is the translation known as Peshitta (simple), dating back to the 2nd century; however, some scholars attribute it to the 5th century and recognize it as the work of the Edessa bishop of Rabula (411-435). Egyptian translations (Said, Fayum, Bogair) are also of great importance,Ethiopian, Armenian, Gothic and Old Latin, later revised by bla. Jerome and recognized in the Catholic Church as self-authenticated (Vulgate).
Quotations from the New Testament, available from the ancient Fathers and Teachers of the Church and church writers, are also of great importance for establishing the text. A collection of these quotes (texts) was published by T. Tsan.
A Slavic translation of the New Testament from the Greek text was made by St. Equal to the Apostles Cyril and Methodius in the second half of the ninth century and together with Christianity passed to us in Russia under St. Vladimir. Of the copies of this translation that we have preserved, the Ostromir Gospel, written in the half of the 11th century for the mayor of Ostromir, is especially remarkable. Then in the 14th century. St. Alexis, Metropolitan of Moscow, translated by St. books of the New Testament, while St. Alexy was in Constantinople. This translation is kept in the Moscow Synodal Library and in the 90s of the 19th century. published in a phototypic manner. In 1499, the New Testament, along with all the biblical books, was revised and published by Metropolitan Gennady of Novgorod. Separately, the entire New Testament was published for the first time in the Slavic language in Vilno in 1623. Then he,like other biblical books, it was corrected in Moscow at the synodal printing house and, finally, it was published together with the Old Testament under Empress Elizabeth in 1751. The Gospel was translated into Russian, first of all, in 1819, and the whole New Testament appeared in Russian in 1822, in 1860 it was published in a revised form. In addition to the synodal translation into Russian, there are also Russian translations of the New Testament published in London and Vienna. In Russia, their use is prohibited. In addition to the synodal translation into Russian, there are also Russian translations of the New Testament published in London and Vienna. In Russia, their use is prohibited. In addition to the synodal translation into Russian, there are also Russian translations of the New Testament published in London and Vienna. In Russia, their use is prohibited.
The fate of the New Testament text
The importance of the New Testament text, its rewriting for use in churches and the readers' interest in its content were the reason that in ancient times much in this text changed, which was complained about in their time, for example, Dionysius of Corinth, St. Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and others. Changes were made to the text both intentionally and not intentionally. The first was done either by heretics, like Marcion, or by the Arians, while the second - by scribes who did not understand the words of the text or, if they wrote under dictation, who could not distinguish where one word or expression ends and another begins. However, sometimes changes were also made by the Orthodox, who tried to remove provincialism, rare words from the text, made grammatical and syntactic corrections, explanatory additions. Sometimes changes resulted from the liturgical use of certain sections of the text.
Thus, the New Testament text could very early, during the 2nd-4th centuries, be completely corrupted, if the Church did not take care of its preservation. It can be noted that already in the early days the representatives of the Church tried to preserve the true form of the text. If Irenaeus, at the conclusion of his work περὶ ὀγδοάδος, asks to copy it in all its accuracy, then, of course, this concern for accuracy was all the more recommended in relation to the books of the New Testament, which contained the text recognized by the Church as the most accurate. Origen was especially diligent in establishing the correct text of the New Testament, and after him - his disciples Pierius and Pamphilus. Isychius and Lucian are also known as the text installers, from whom he himself left a rewritten copy of the New Testament, the text of which was kept in his interpretations by Vasily V. Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom, as well as Theodorite. It is to these men that we owe the preservation of the New Testament text in its original form, despite the existence of many discrepancies (these discrepancies are given by Tischendorf in the 8th edition of the New Testament under the lines of the text).
For the first time in printed form the text of the New Testament appeared in the Complutenian Polyglot of Cardinal Ximenez in 1544. A Latin translation was also included. Then in 1516 the edition of Erasmus appeared (in Basel), in 1565 the edition of Theodore Beza (in Geneva), which served as the original for the authorized translation of 1611. The editions of the New Testament of the Elsevier brothers' booksellers (in Leiden) found themselves even more widespread. which began to appear from 1624 In the second edition of the Elsevirs (1633) it is said: "So you now have a text accepted by all (ab omnibus receptum), in which we do not give anything changed or corrupted."This bold assertion of bookselling advertising was accepted by the theologians of the 17th century as complete perfect truth, and thus, for a whole century, this text received the rights of an inviolable text by all (Textus Receptus, denoted, by the initial letter of Stephen's name, the letter S). In our Russian Church this translation has become a guideline and is still being printed by St. Synod. Until 1904, the English Bible Society also distributed only this text. Since the 18th century, however, they have already begun to abandon the veneration with which this text was previously treated, and new editions began to appear, more accurately reproducing the type of the oldest text of the New Testament. The most famous editions of Griesbach (1777), K. Lachman (1831), Tischendorf (1st edition in 1811, the last - posthumous - in 1894), which, in fact,reproduced the Sinai Codex found by him, Trigels, Westcot and Hort (1881), Nestlé (1834), von Soden (1902 and 1906).
The latest research has shaken the confidence that Tischendorf, Westcot, Hort and B. Weiss had in the most ancient uncial manuscripts, but at the same time it is recognized that neither the Syrian nor the Western texts of the New Testament, which some scholars expressed too exaggerated hopes. Therefore, biblical science is currently urging all New Testament scholars to take into account the internal reasons for and against when establishing the reading of this or that place. Even our synodal publishers, in the last four-language edition of the New Testament, try to check the Greek text with various references with other texts, that is, they do a certain critical work on the text. But from the publication itself it is not clear what rules the correctors of the text were guided by,and therefore it is useful to present here the rules of criticism of the text, developed by Western biblical science, as set out in Barthes. (Introduction, p. 442 et seq., Ed. 1908).
1) A shorter type of reading is more original than a more extensive one, since it is clear that a short and therefore often dark and difficult to understand position was explained by notes in the margins, and these notes could later be taken into the text, while hardly a later scribe would dare reduce sacred sayings to the point of making them incomprehensible. 2) The more difficult kind of reading is older than the easier one, because no one was interested in introducing difficulty into the text, while relief of the difficulty was a need for many. 3) Types of reading that do not make sense should be rejected, even if they have the evidence of manuscripts for themselves. Here, of course, we mean not such thoughts that do not correspond to anything our view, but such,which are in obvious contradiction with other thoughts of the same writer and generally contradict the connection of the thoughts of his work. 4) The types of reading, from which one can explain to oneself the appearance of discrepancies, should be preferred to parallel types of reading. 5) Only where the previously listed internal grounds do not say anything positive, it is necessary to resolve the issue on the basis of the most ancient manuscripts and other witnesses. 6) Corrections without evidence of the manuscripts can be made only where the text devoted by antiquity does not allow any satisfactory explanation to be made at all. But even such amendments should not be introduced into the text, but only placed under the line of the text. (Of the new critics of the text, Blass proposes many amendments in his writings).should be preferred over parallel reading. 5) Only where the previously listed internal grounds do not say anything positive, it is necessary to resolve the issue on the basis of the most ancient manuscripts and other witnesses. 6) Corrections without evidence of the manuscripts can be made only where the text devoted by antiquity does not allow any satisfactory explanation to be made at all. But even such amendments should not be introduced into the text, but only placed under the line of the text. (Of the new critics of the text, Blass proposes many amendments in his writings).should be preferred over parallel reading. 5) Only where the previously listed internal grounds do not say anything positive, it is necessary to resolve the issue on the basis of the most ancient manuscripts and other witnesses. 6) Corrections without evidence of the manuscripts can be made only where the text devoted by antiquity does not allow any satisfactory explanation to be made at all. But even such amendments should not be introduced into the text, but only placed under the line of the text. (Of the new critics of the text, Blass proposes many amendments in his writings).where the text betrayed by antiquity does not allow any satisfactory explanation at all. But even such amendments should not be introduced into the text, but only placed under the line of the text. (Of the new critics of the text, Blass proposes many amendments in his writings).where the text betrayed by antiquity does not allow any satisfactory explanation at all. But even such amendments should not be introduced into the text, but only placed under the line of the text. (Of the new critics of the text, Blass proposes many amendments in his works).
For the Orthodox interpreter, of course, when establishing the type of reading in difficult places, it is necessary to be guided primarily by church tradition, as it is given in the interpretations of the Fathers and teachers of the Church.
For this, the Spirit of Moscow published under the Theological Bulletin can serve as an excellent guide. The Academy translates the works of St. Fathers (for example, Cyril of Alexandria).
Gospel
The expression "Gospel" (to euaggelion) in classical Greek was used to mean: a) the reward given to the messenger of joy (tw euaggelw), b) a sacrifice slain on the occasion of receiving some good news or a holiday committed on the same occasion and c) this good news itself.
In the New Testament, this expression means: a) the good news that Christ accomplished the reconciliation of people with God and brought us the greatest blessings - mainly founded the Kingdom of God on earth (Matt IV: 23), b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by him Himself and His apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God (2 Cor. IV: 4), c) everything in general is the New Testament, or Christian, teaching, first of all, the story of the most important events from the life of Christ (1 Kop XV: 1-4), and then an explanation of the meaning of these events (Rom. I: 16). d) Being the actual message of what God has done for our salvation and good, the Gospel at the same time calls people to repentance, faith and change their sinful life for the better (Mark I: 15. Phil I: 27). e) Finally,the expression "Gospel" is sometimes used to denote the very process of preaching Christian doctrine (Rom. I: 1). Sometimes the expression "Gospel" is added to its designation and content. There are, for example, phrases: the gospel of the kingdom (Matt IV: 23), that is, the good news about the kingdom of God, the gospel of peace (Eph VI: 15), that is, about the world, the gospel of salvation (Eph I, 13), that is, about salvation, etc. Sometimes the genus following the expression "Gospel". pad. denotes the culprit or source of the good news (Rom. I: 1; XV: 16; 2 Cor. XI: 7; 1 Sol II: 8) or the person of the preacher (Rom. II: 16). Sometimes the genus following the expression “Gospel”. pad. denotes the culprit or source of the good news (Rom. I: 1; XV: 16; 2 Cor. XI: 7; 1 Sol II: 8) or the person of the preacher (Rom. II: 16). Sometimes the genus following the expression “Gospel”. pad. denotes the culprit or source of the good news (Rom. I: 1; XV: 16; 2 Cor. XI: 7; 1 Sol II: 8) or the person of the preacher (Rom. II: 16).
For quite a long time, the legends about the life of the Lord Jesus Christ were transmitted only orally. The Lord Himself did not leave any records of His speeches and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were people “not bookish and simple” (Acts IV: 13), although literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic time, there were also very few “wise in the flesh, strong and noble” (1 Cor. I: 26), and for most believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. Thus, the apostles and preachers or evangelists “transmitted” (paradidonai) legends about the deeds and speeches of Christ, and the believers “received” (paralambanein), but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said about the students of rabbinical schools, but with the whole soul, as if something living and giving life. But soon this period of oral tradition had to end. One side,Christians should have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as you know, denied the reality of Christ's miracles and even argued that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have authentic legends about Christ of those persons who were either among His apostles, or were in close communion with eyewitnesses of Christ's deeds. On the other hand, the need for a written account of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses of Christ's miracles were thinning. Therefore, it was required to consolidate in writing certain sayings of the Lord and the purpose of His speech, as well as the stories of the apostles about Him. It was then that separate records of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ began to appear here and there. They wrote down the words of Christ most carefully, which contained the rules of Christian life, and were much freer about the transmission of various events from the life of Christ, keeping only their general impression. Thus, one in these records, by virtue of its originality, was transmitted everywhere according to; the other was modified. These initial recordings did not think about the completeness of the narrative. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John (XXI: 25), did not intend to communicate all the speeches and deeds of Christ. This is evident, by the way, from what is not included in them, for example, such a saying of Christ: “it is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts XX: 35). Such records are reported by E. Luke, saying that many before him had already begun to compose accounts of the life of Christ,but that they did not have the proper completeness and that therefore they did not give a sufficient "confirmation" in faith (Luke I: 1-4).
Obviously, our canonical Gospels arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined approximately in thirty years - from the 60th to the 90th (the last was the Gospel of John). The three first Gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical science, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be easily viewed in one and combined into one whole narrative (synoptics - from Greek - means: looking together). They began to be called the Gospels each separately, perhaps at the end of the first century, but from the church writing we have information that such a name was given to the entire composition of the Gospels only in the second half of the second century. As for the titles: "The Gospel of Matthew", "The Gospel of Mark", etc., then these are more correct,very ancient names from Greek must be translated as follows: "The Gospel according to Matthew", "The Gospel according to Mark" (kata Matqaion kata M.). By this, the church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, the other to Mark, etc.
Lopukhin A. P.