The 28th edition of the Nestle-Aland text presents, for the Catholic Epistles, the text of the 2nd edition of the Editio Critica Maior (not yet published). A comparison of the text of ECM1 with the text of NA28(= ECM2) indicates that there are 13 differences between the first and second editions, as follows:
It is striking that 8 of the 13 differences between the two editions are not marked by either a diamond (♦)—which “indicates passages where the guiding line is split in the second edition of the ECM, because there are two variants which in the editors’ judgement could equally well be adopted in the reconstructed initial text” (NA28, “Introduction,” 55*)—or bold dot(s), which sometimes signal alternative readings of equal value to the text and sometimes simply mark passages calling for “special critical consideration” (ECM, 24*). Furthermore, of the 5 readings that are marked by bold dots or the diamond, none are marked by both dots and a diamond.
Reference | NA28 (ECM2) | ECM1 |
Jas 1:20 | οὐ κατεργάζεται | •οὐκ ἐργάζεται• |
Jas 1:22 | ♦μόνον ἀκροατὶ | ἀκροατὶ μόνον |
Jas 2:4 | καὶ οὐ διεκρίθητε | οὐ διεκρίθητε |
Jas 2:15 | λειπόμενοι ὦσιν | λειπόμενοι |
Jas 4:10 | τοῦ κυρίου | κυρίου |
1 P 2:5 | θεῷ | •τῷ• θεῷ |
1 Pet 5:1 | τοὺς | οὖν |
2 P 2:18 | ὄντως | •ὀλίγως• |
2 P 2:20 | κυρίου | •κυρίου ἡμῶν• |
1 J 3:7 | Παιδία | τεκνία |
2 J 5 | γράφων σοι καινὴν | καινὴν γράφων σοι |
2 J 12 | ᾖ πεπληρωμένη | πεπληρωμένη ᾖ |
3 J 4 | ἐν ἀληθείᾳ | ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ |
It is striking that 8 of the 13 differences between the two editions are not marked by either a diamond (♦)—which “indicates passages where the guiding line is split in the second edition of the ECM, because there are two variants which in the editors’ judgement could equally well be adopted in the reconstructed initial text” (NA28, “Introduction,” 55*)—or bold dot(s), which sometimes signal alternative readings of equal value to the text and sometimes simply mark passages calling for “special critical consideration” (ECM, 24*). Furthermore, of the 5 readings that are marked by bold dots or the diamond, none are marked by both dots and a diamond.
A comparison of bold dotted and diamond readings throughout the Catholic Epistles produces the following results (all numbers subject to confirmation):
Total # of readings with diamond, dot(s), or both: 107
# of diamond readings with no corresponding dot(s): 19
# of readings with both diamond and dot(s): 22
# of dotted readings with no corresponding diamond: 66
That is, of the 107 marked variants, only 22 (20.5%) share the diamond and dot(s), while 85 (79.5%) have either one or the other, but not both.
These numbers indicate that the means of signaling uncertainty in the text—dotted readings in ECM1, and “split guiding line” readings in ECM2 (= the diamond readings in NA28) overlap in only about 1 in 5 instances. Of the 88 “dotted” readings marked in ECM1, only 22 of them (25%) are marked in ECM2—a noticeable reduction. But at the same time, of the 41 diamond readings marked in ECM2, nearly half, 19 (= 46%), are new to that edition—a substantial proportion of the whole. Finally, one must keep in view the fact that of the 13 differences between ECM1and ECM2, 8 (61%) are not marked (with a diamond or dots) in either edition of ECM.
Mike Holmes