\NormalFont\ShortTitle{Preface}

{\MT PREFACE

\par }{\IP Once upon a time I was led to believe that Hermann von Soden’s\FTNT{*}{{\FR : }{\FT{{\IT{Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments in ihrer ältesten erreichbaren Textgestalt}} (Göttingen: Vanderhoeck und Ruprecht, 4 vols., 1911-1913).}}} work was basically reliable. This was important because his work underlies both the Hodges Farstad and Robinson-Pierpont editions of the Majority (Byzantine) Text. However, the
{\IT{Text und Textwert}} ({\IT{TuT}})\FTNT{†}{{\FR : }{\FT{{\IT{Text und Textwert der Griechischen Handschriften des Neuen Testaments}} (Ed. Kurt Aland, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter). The series contains over a dozen volumes, covering the entire New Testament except for the second half of John.}}} collations demonstrate objectively that not infrequently Soden is seriously off the mark. Maurice Robinson’s collations of the
{\IT{Pericope Adulterae}}\FTNT{‡}{{\FR : }{\FT{So far as I know, this material has not yet been published; Robinson gave me the opportunity of working with a private copy of his collation pages.}}} demonstrate objectively that Soden is very seriously wrong there. With reference to Soden’s treatment of codex 223 K.W. Clark stated, “Furthermore, our collation has revealed sixty-two errors in 229 readings treated by von Soden.”\FTNT{§}{{\FR : }{\FT{{\IT{Eight American Praxapostoloi}} (Kenneth W. Clark, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1941, p. 12).}}} 27\% in error (62÷229) is altogether too much, and what is true of MS 223 may be true of other MSS as well. Hoskier was not entirely mistaken in his evaluation. For myself, I had to reconsider the evidence for the whole New Testament, and that exercise led me to the conclusion that the most important segment of the relevant evidence had been overlooked (more precisely, it had been despised, and therefore ignored).

\par }{\IP Herewith a new Greek Text, and critical apparatus, for the entire New Testament, based on that important segment. I call that segment Family 35, because cursive 35 is the complete New Testament, faithful to the family archetype, with the smallest number. (Cursive 18, also a complete NT, defects from the family in Revelation.) For a thorough explanation of why I prefer Family 35,\FTNT{*}{{\FR : }{\FT{As explained elsewhere, I now use
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} instead of
{\BD{K}}{\SUP{r}}. I further insist that
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} should be factored out of the broad Byzantine tradition and be presented separately, because I now believe that
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} is earlier than
{\BD{K}}{\SUP{x}}, etc., being the base from which the others departed.}}} please see my book,
{\IT{God Has Preserved His Text!}} (3rd edition).\FTNT{†}{{\FR : }{\FT{The book is available from Amazon.com. A free PDF download is available at www.prunch.org.}}} I there argue that God has preserved the precise original wording of the NT, and that we can, and do, know what it is, based on an empirical procedure. I claim to have demonstrated the superiority of Family 35 based on
{\IT{size}},
{\IT{independence}},
{\IT{age}},
{\IT{geographical distribution}},
{\IT{profile}},
{\IT{care}}, and
{\IT{range}}. I challenge any and all to do the same for any other line of transmission.

\par }{\IP In the statements of evidence I have included the percentage of manuscript attestation for each variant within either ( ) or [ ].\FTNT{‡}{{\FR : }{\FT{So far as I know, mine is the first apparatus to offer this information.}}} I have used ( ) for the evidence taken from
{\IT{TuT}}, which I take to be reasonably precise. For the variant sets that are not covered there I used a variety of sources, which vary from book to book (please see the final footnote for each book for that information)—the percentages offered, I have used [ ] for these, are extrapolations based on a comparison of those sources. I have determined the reading of
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} on the basis of well over thirty minuscule manuscripts (usually over forty, or even fifty) for each book, all of which I collated myself.\FTNT{§}{{\FR : }{\FT{I hold a copy of a perfect representative of the
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} archetype for 22 of the 27 NT books, and my best copy is perfect for 17 of them. Quite apart from these, most of the scribes who copied
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} exemplars did very careful work. The care with which
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} exemplars were copied contrasts sharply with that afforded to exemplars of all other lines of transmission.}}} Since the MSS come from all over the Mediterranean world (including most monasteries on the Mt. Athos peninsula), the chances that they do not represent the main line of transmission are, quite frankly, nil. So here you have the archetypal Text of
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}}, beyond reasonable question.

\par }{\IP I have included six published editions in the apparatus—RP,HF,OC,TR,CP,NU.\FTNT{*}{{\FR : }{\FT{RP = Robinson-Pierpont (2005), HF = Hodges-Farstad, OC = the text of the Orthodox Churches, TR =
{\IT{Textus Receptus}}, CP = Complutensian Polyglot, NU = N-A{\SUP{26}}/UBS{\SUP{3}} (N-A{\SUP{27}}/UBS{\SUP{4}} offer changes in the critical apparatus,
{\EM{not}} in the text; the text is still that of N-A{\SUP{26}}/UBS{\SUP{3}}).}}} So how do I justify this new text and apparatus? Well, just the critical apparatus justifies the edition, being by far the most informative with reference to the large Byzantine majority and to
{\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}}, which is both ancient and independent of the rest of the tradition. Also, my Text is sufficiently distinct from the rest to justify its existence (over a thousand differences from either HF or RP). For those who believe in an inerrant Text, as I do, each word is important (and even the spelling may prove to be significant).\FTNT{†}{{\FR : }{\FT{I venture to affirm to the reader that all original wording of the NT is preserved in this edition, if not in the Text, at least in the apparatus. “Diminish not a word” Jeremiah 26:2 (see Deuteronomy 4:2 and Luke 4:4, “every word” [as in 99.6\% of the MSS]).}}}

\par }{\IP Where all six printed editions are in agreement, I arbitrarily limit inclusion in the apparatus to variants with at least [10\%] attestation. Also, I have arbitrarily included the movable-{\IT{nu}} in the Text, as well as the full form of οὕτως, at all points.\FTNT{‡}{{\FR : }{\FT{Anyone who wishes to apply a numeric code to this Text should keep that in mind.}}}

\par }{\IP As an arbitrary decision, I have limited the citation of individual MSS to those dated to the 5{\SUP{th}} century or earlier. I use
{\IT{rell}} to indicate that the reading is supported by all other witnesses (continuous text MSS, although until all of them have been collated this is obviously inexact), and printed editions (of the six included in the apparatus), compared to the other reading.\FTNT{§}{{\FR : }{\FT{My apparatus does not include lectionaries, patristic citations or ancient versions. I can explain why to anyone who is interested.}}}

\par }{\IP Quotation marks have been added throughout to facilitate a correct understanding of the text. Because standard English quotation marks too closely resemble rough and smooth breathing marks, double angle quotation marks « » are used. Nested quotations are indicated by single angle quotations marks ‹ ›, and nested quotations within nested quotations are indicated by double angle quotations marks « ». When a quotation continues with a new paragraph, it is indicated with right-pointing double angle quotations marks ».

\par }{\IP It is the aim of the editors of this volume to produce a text which exactly represents Family 35 with an apparatus that faithfully reproduces the evidence for the variants from the manuscripts and published editions cited in the footnotes. If you come across any errors in the text or apparatus, please contact:

\par }{\IB \par }
{\IM Wilbur Pickering

\par }{\IM wilbur.pickering@gmail.com

\par }{\IB \par }
{\IM or

\par }{\IB \par }
{\IM Robert A. Boyd

\par }{\IM boydr1@gmail.com

\par }{\IB \par }
{\IS Editions of the Greek New Testament cited in the Apparatus

\par }\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|c|}
\hline
\BDE CP
 & \BDE Complutensian Polyglot
\\
\hline
\BDE {\BD{f}}{\SUP{35}} & \BDE Wilbur N. Pickering.
{\IT{The New Testament According to Family 35.}} 3rd ed. WNP, 2020.
\\
\hline
\BDE HF & \BDE Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad, eds.
{\IT{The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text.}} 2nd ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985.
\\
\hline
\BDE NU & \BDE Nestle-Aland 26{\SUP{th}} edition and United Bible Societies 3{\SUP{rd}} edition
\\
\hline
\BDE Nestle{\SUP{24}} & \BDE Nestle 24{\SUP{th}} edition
\\
\hline
\BDE Nestle{\SUP{25}} & \BDE Nestle 25{\SUP{th}} edition
\\
\hline
\BDE UBS{\SUP{2}}
 & \BDE UBS 2{\SUP{nd}} edition
\\
\hline
\BDE OC & \BDE Orthodox Church
\\
\hline
\BDE RP
 & \BDE {\IT{The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform 2005.}} Compiled and arranged by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont. Southborough, MA: Chilton Book Publishing, 2005.
\\
\hline
\BDE TR & \BDE Textus Receptus
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
{\IB \par }
{\IS Signs and Abbreviations Used in the Apparatus

\par }\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|c|}
\hline
\BDE 𝕻{\SUP{1}} & \BDE Capital letter 𝕻 indicates a papyrus. The superscript number that follows indicates the number of the papyrus.
\\
\hline
\BDE {\BD{M}}{\SUP{1}} & \BDE Capital letter
{\BD{M}} followed by a superscript number indicates a particular line of transmission within the
{\IT{Pericope Adulterae}} (John 7:53–8:11).
\\
\hline
\BDE {\BD{M}}{\SUP{a}} & \BDE Capital letter
{\BD{M}} followed by a superscript letter indicates a particular line of transmission within the book of Revelation.
\\
\hline
\BDE {\SUP{pt}} & \BDE The superscript letters
{\SUP{pt}} indicates part of the family of manuscripts or line of transmission. Often this directly follows the superscript letter, such as
{\SUP{apt}}, which means part of the
{\SUP{a}} line of transmission.
\\
\hline
\BDE {\SUP{½}} & \BDE A superscript fraction
{\SUP{½}} indicates a fraction of the family of manuscripts or line of transmission. Often this directly follows the superscript letter, such as
{\SUP{a½}}, which means half of the
{\SUP{a}} line of transmission.
\\
\hline
\BDE ( ) & \BDE Witnesses which show only minor differences are noted in parentheses along with the witnesses for the main variant.
\\
\hline
\BDE [NU] & \BDE Brackets around NU indicate that the NU editors are not completely convinced of the authenticity of the text.
\\
\hline
\BDE [?] & \BDE Brackets around a question mark indicate indicates doubt as to the reading of variant.
\\
\hline
\BDE [!?] & \BDE Brackets around an exclamation point and a question mark indicate a questionable and surprising editorial decision.
\\
\hline
\BDE [[NU]] & \BDE Double brackets around NU indicate that the NU editors do not consider the text to be original.
\\
\hline
\BDE «OC» & \BDE Double angle quotation marks around OC indicate that the OC editors do not consider the text to be original.
\\
\hline
\BDE ¦ & \BDE A broken bar separates the instances of variation from each other within a single verse or section of the apparatus.
\\
\hline
\BDE — & \BDE Three hyphens indicate that the variant omits the footnoted text.
\\
\hline
\BDE … & \BDE An ellipsis indicates that the variant form cited is in agreement with the text.
\\
\hline
\BDE ~
 & \BDE A tilde indicates that the words in the text are transposed by the witnesses cited. The word order of the variant(s) is indicated by the numerals that follow (see below).
\\
\hline
\BDE 2 3 1 4
 & \BDE Variants of word order are represented by numerals which correspond to the order of the words in the text (1 = the first word in the text, etc.) This convention is followed not just for variants of transposition indicated by a tilde, but also for alternative forms within a single variation unit.
\\
\hline
\BDE {\SUP{c}} & \BDE The superscript letter
{\SUP{c}} indicates a correction made by a later hand, but sometimes also by the first hand.
\\
\hline
\BDE {\SUP{v}} & \BDE The superscript letter
{\SUP{v}} indicates that the reading attested by a witness cannot be determined with absolute certainty ({\IT{ut videtur}}).
\\
\hline
\BDE {\IT{rell}}
 & \BDE The abbreviation
{\IT{rell}} indicates that the rest of the manuscript tradition supports the text or variant ({\IT{reliqui}}).
\\
\hline
\BDE + & \BDE A plus sign indicates additional text in witnesses that support the main variant.
\\
\hline
\BDE − & \BDE A minus sign indicates text missing from witnesses that support the main variant.
\\
\hline
\BDE → & \BDE An arrow sign indicates a probable correction made to the text.
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}

